Keiron Starns Care Agency

Updated 30 June 2018

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 was a comprehensive inspection. The inspection took place on 13 June and was announced. The provider was given 48 hours’ notice because the location provides domiciliary care services. The registered manager is often out supporting staff or people. We wanted to make sure the registered manager would be available to support our inspection. The inspection was carried out by one inspector.

Before the inspection we reviewed other information we held about the service, including previous inspection reports and notifications sent to us by the provider. Notifications are information about specific important events the service is legally required to send to us. We also looked at information in the 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.

During the inspection we spoke with three people using the service, two members of staff and the registered manager. After the inspection we spoke to another member of staff. We also received written feedback from one relative, and one professional. We reviewed three people's care and support records and two staff files. We also looked at records relating to the management of the service such as incident and accident records, meeting minutes, recruitment and training records, policies, audits and complaints.

Updated 30 June 2018

Keiron Starns Care Agency provides care and support to three people with learning disabilities living in the community.

This service provides care and support to people living in one 'supported living' setting, so that they can live in their own home as independently as possible. People's care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. CQC does not regulate premises used for supported living; this inspection looked at people’s personal care and support.

At our last inspection we rated the service good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

People said they felt safe. Staff knew how to keep people safe. Risk assessments were in place and we saw examples of positive risk taking. These enabled people to be as independent as possible whilst maintaining their safety. Safe recruitment processes were undertaken. Medicines were managed safely.

Staff had been trained to carry out their roles. They had regular supervision sessions with the registered manager and all said they felt well supported. 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. One relative said, “[Person’s name] has developed a great deal more independence and confidence since he has opted for independent living.”

We observed many positive interactions between staff and people using the service. One person said, “Staff are nice. They make me laugh.” Staff we spoke with spoke passionately about the support they provided.

Support plans were person centred and clearly detailed people’s preferences and choices about how they wanted to be supported. People were involved in writing and reviewing their plans. There was a complaints procedure in place. No complaints had been received since our last inspection.

The registered manager was a visible presence. Their values were clearly embedded in the service. Staff told us the registered manager was “very, very good” and “brilliant.” One relative said, “[Registered manager] has ensured that my son is able to develop his skills through enrolling him in college and finding him employment in the community.” There were quality assurance processes in place.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.