24 November 2016
During a routine inspection
This inspection took place on 24 November 2016 and was announced. We gave the registered provider notice of the inspection to make sure that the registered manager was available on the day of the inspection. This inspection was to check that the registered provider was now meeting legal requirements we had identified as not being met at inspections in January 2015, April 2016 and July 2016.
At the comprehensive inspection in January 2015 we found the registered provider was in breach of regulation pertaining to good governance. At the comprehensive inspection of the service in April 2016 we found the registered provider had failed to achieve compliance with this regulation. The focused inspection held on July 2016 found that the registered provider had met this breach of regulation, but further work was needed to embed new practices. During this inspection we found further improvements had taken place and robust monitoring of the service was evident.
At the comprehensive inspection of April 2016 we found the registered provider was in breach of regulation pertaining to safe care and treatment. During this inspection we found improvements had taken place in relation to the safe handling of medicines and there was sufficient evidence to say this breach of regulation was now met.
The registered provider is required to have a registered manager and there was a registered manager in post who was registered with the Commission. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
The people using the service told us that they felt confident about their safety. We found that their support workers had a good knowledge of how to keep people safe from harm and the support workers had been employed following robust recruitment and selection processes.
There were sufficient support workers employed to meet people’s individual needs. The support workers received induction, training and supervision from the management team and we saw they had the necessary skills and knowledge to meet people’s needs. Communication was effective, people’s mental capacity was appropriately assessed and their rights were protected.
People told us that they had been included in planning and agreeing to the care provided. We saw that people had an individual plan, detailing the support they needed and how they wanted this to be provided. People had risk assessments in their care files to help minimise risks whilst still supporting people to make choices and decisions. There was a complaints procedure in place and people told us that they would not hesitate to contact the agency office if they had a concern.
We observed good interactions between people who used the service and staff on the day of the inspection. We found that people received compassionate care from kind staff and that staff knew about people’s needs and preferences. People were supplied with the information they needed at the right time, were involved in all aspects of their care and were always asked for their consent before staff undertook support tasks. People were happy with the assistance they received with the preparation of meals.
People were treated with respect and dignity by the support workers. Every person we met, or spoke with, agreed that they received a very personal service from support workers they knew and trusted.
People and the support workers told us that the service was well managed. The registered manager monitored the quality of the service, supported the support workers and ensured that people who used the service were able to make suggestions and input to the development of the service.