27 March 2019
During a routine inspection
People’s experience of using this service: People were supported safely. The potential hazards that people faced during their support and from the wider environment was always taken into account. Medication administration was robust and person- centred. Staff always arrived on time and provided support within the agreed timescale. People felt safe with the staff team and trusted them.
People told us that staff were knowledgeable and knew what they were doing. Staff received the training they needed to perform their role and received supervision so that they could discuss work practice as well as professional development. Sufficient measures were in place to enable new staff to become familiar with and be prepared for their role. The nutritional needs of people were met. People were always asked to give their consent before support was given.
Without exception, people told us that they were supported in respectful and friendly way with staff respecting the fact that they were visiting a person’s home. Support was provided in a patient and unhurried manner with an emphasis on maintaining people’s privacy and dignity. The communication needs of people were taken into account with staff taking the time to ensure that people were able to express themselves and make their needs known.
Support was provided in a person-centred way. People who used the service were able to contribute and be in control of the ways in which they were supported. People did not have any complaints but felt confident that any issues would be listened to and acted upon.
People felt they received a well-run service. The registered manager was very familiar with the individual needs of people and was very visible and available to all people. The registered manager was seen as approachable and supportive to the staff team. The registered provider had robust quality assurance processes in place to measure the quality of support given. The views of people who used the service and their relatives were listened to. People told us that they felt involved, in control and were listened to. The registered provider worked closely with other agencies to ensure positive outcomes for people and to maximise their independence.
Rating at last inspection: The service was rated as requires good at our last inspection in August 2016.
Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the rating at the last inspection. The service remains good overall.
Follow up: We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received we may inspect sooner.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk