The Care Quality Commission
  • Services in your home
  • Homecare service

Archived: Venesta Domiciliary Care Agency - Manchester

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Crumpsall Lane, Manchester, M8 4ED (0161) 225 3609

Provided and run by:
Venesta Agencies Ltd

Important: This service is now registered at a different address - see new profile
Important: This service was previously registered at a different address - see old profile

All Inspections

5th August 2014

During a routine inspection

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, and to pilot a new process being introduced by CQC which looks at the overall quality of the service. 

This inspection was unannounced. During the visit, we spoke with four people who used the service, three support staff, the registered manager and a senior manager. After the inspection we contacted four relatives via the telephone for their feedback about the service. We also spoke with the commissioning team from Manchester City Council. 

The service had a registered manager who had been registered since July 2014. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service and shares the legal responsibility for meeting the requirements of the law with the provider. 

Venesta Domiciliary Care Agency is registered to provide personal care to people living within their own homes or in supported accommodation. The agency mainly works with people with mental health and/or learning disability needs within the Manchester area.  

We looked at records held in the office and visited people in their own homes. People told us they felt safe in their home because they were supported by staff who knew them well and who they trusted.  

We found people were supported by sufficient numbers of suitably qualified, skilled and experienced staff. Robust recruitment and selection procedures were in place and appropriate checks had been undertaken before staff began work. This included obtaining references from previous employers to show staff which were employed were safe to work with vulnerable people.  

People’s needs were assessed and care and support was planned and delivered in line with their individual care needs. The support plans contained a good level of information setting out exactly how each person should be supported to ensure their needs were met. Care and support was tailored to meet people’s individual needs and staff knew people well. The support plans included risk assessments. Staff had good relationships with the people they supported and their homes had a relaxed atmosphere.  

We observed interactions between staff and people using the service were kind and respectful. Staff told us they enjoyed their jobs and said they were well supported within their roles.

People we spoke with did not raise any complaints or concerns about the service. We saw the complaints log which told us the manager investigated and responded to people’s complaints, according to the provider’s complaints procedure.  

There were effective systems in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service provided.

29 November 2013

During a routine inspection

We visited three houses where the service provided care and support and we spoke with three people who used the service. We were told: 'I'm happy here'. "I'm ok they look after us'. And: 'They look after us all'.

During our last inspection in October 2012 we had highlighted concerns with the way the provider obtained consent from people who used the service as well as the systems in place for protecting people, the management of medicines and complaints. We asked the provider to take action.

During this inspection we spoke with staff who informed us that they were happy with the provider and that the service had improved since changes in management had happened.

We found that systems were in place to gain informed consent from people who used the service and their rights were protected.

People's care was planned and recorded in well organised care plans and people's care was regularly reviewed.

We found that people who used the service were protected from abuse and the provider had systems in place to ensure that any staff employed were safe and suitable to work with vulnerable people.

There was a complaint system in place. People had been given information on how to make a complaint and complaints we looked at showed that complaints received had been recorded and dealt with in a timely manner.

11, 12 October 2012

During a routine inspection

We spoke with eight people who used the agency. One person said: "I feel supported. They are very good". Another person said: "They do a good job........They make sure we're alright". A third person said: "We're well looked after here; no doubt about that". Three people who were supported by the agency to manage their finances commented that they were not receiving regular information about their finances to help them understand how much money they could spend or had saved.

Where people did not have the capacity to consent, it was not clear that the provider acted in accordance with legal requirements. We also found that the arrangements for safeguarding, management of medicines and complaints handling needed to improve.

7 March 2012

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We did a compliance review of this service in September 2011. As part of that review we spoke to people who use services and they were very happy with the care they received. This review was a follow up review to check that the service had taken action to address areas where they were non compliant with regulations. We did not speak to people who use services during this review.