Archived: Scope Community Services Cambridgeshire

Updated 26 August 2017

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This inspection took place on 24 and 26 July 2017 and was announced. This was so that staff and service users would be available during the inspection. The inspection was carried out by one inspector.

Before the inspection, the provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We looked at this and other information we hold about the service. This included information from notifications received by us. A notification is information about important events which the provider is required to send to us by law. Before the inspection we asked for information from representatives of the local authority contracts monitoring team; the local authority safeguarding team; Healthwatch and a physiotherapist to aid us with planning this inspection.

During the inspection we spoke with one person who used the service and two relatives of people using the service. We also spoke with the registered manager, one support worker and an agency staff member. We looked at two people’s care records and records in relation to the management of the service; quality monitoring records; management of staff; management of people’s medicines; compliments and complaints, and three staff recruitment files. We also observed the care and support people received to assist us in our understanding of the quality of care provided to people with limited communication skills. We also received additional evidence to support the inspection from the provider on the 26th July 2017.

Updated 26 August 2017

Scope Community Services Cambridgeshire provides personal care for adults, with a learning disability, physical disability, sensory impairment and/or autistic spectrum disorder in their own homes. At the time of our inspection there were four people using this service.

The service had a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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.

This inspection was carried out on 24 and 26 July 2017 and was an announced inspection. This is the first inspection of this service since it was registered with the CQC in May 2016.

Staff understood their duty to report suspicions of poor care and harm. Staff were only employed by the service to look after people, once all pre-employment checks had been completed and were found to be satisfactory. There was a sufficient number of suitably trained staff to provide people with safe care and support.

Staff helped people in a way that maintained their safety and people were looked after by staff in a kind, and patient manner. Staff engaged with people they assisted in a caring way. Staff supported and encouraged people to make their own choices and live as independently as possible. People were treated with respect and dignity from the staff members who assisted them. People’s privacy was promoted by staff.

People’s care arrangements took account of people’s wishes and choices, including their likes and dislikes, what was important to them and any future goals. Care and support plans recorded people’s individual assessed needs and any assistance they required from staff. Risks to people were identified, and plans were put into place by staff to monitor and minimise these risks, as far as possible, without limiting people’s independence and choice.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

Staff enjoyed their work and were supported and managed to look after the people they assisted. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities in meeting people’s needs and they were trained to provide effective and safe care. Staff were supported to maintain their skills and the standard of staff members’ work performance was reviewed by way of supervision, competency checks, and personal development plans [appraisals].

People were supported to take their medicines as prescribed and medicines were safely managed by staff who were trained, and whose competency had been assessed.

The service was flexible and responsive to people’s needs. People were encouraged to maintain contact with their relatives and friends when they wished to do so. Staff assisted people to maintain and develop their links with the local community and encouraged them to continue with any hobbies and pursue their interests.

People were supported to eat and drink sufficient amounts of food and fluids. People’s choice about what they wished to eat and drink was promoted and supported. Staff monitored people’s health and well-being needs and acted upon issues identified by assisting people to access a range of external health care services.

There was a process in place to manage any compliments, suggestions, and complaints received and to resolve them to the complainants’ satisfaction.

Staff meetings were opportunities for staff to feedback their experiences and receive updates about the service and organisation. Staff were encouraged to raise any suggestions or concerns they may have had at these meetings. Staff felt supported and listened to by the registered manager. Staff knew the values of the service and these service values were embedded.

Arrangements were in place to ensure the quality of the service provided for people was regularly monitored. People who used the service and their relatives were encouraged to share their views and feedback about the quality of the care and support provided and felt listened to. Actions were taken as a result to drive forward any improvements required and implement continual improvement.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.