We carried out a review of the data available to us about Alzheimer's Support on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Alzheimer's Support, you can give feedback on this service.
Alzheimer’s Support is a domiciliary care agency providing personal care to people in their own home. At the time of our inspection there were eight people receiving personal care from the service. The service provides support for people living with dementia to enjoy social contact and continue to pursue their interests. The service also supports family carers to have a break.
Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also consider any wider social care provided.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People and their relative’s felt safe with support staff in their home. There were effective safeguarding systems in place and staff had a good understanding of what to do to protect people from harm.
The provider had taken action to keep people safe and manage the risks they faced. Relatives were confident staff had the knowledge and skills needed to keep people safe.
Staff were thoroughly checked before they started providing care, to ensure they had the appropriate experience and character.
Staff had a good understanding of the support people needed. People had been supported to develop clear care plans, which set out how their individual needs should be met. The plans were specific to people and contained detailed information for staff.
The service had good infection prevention and control measures in place. Relative’s told us staff always wore the correct personal protective equipment (PPE) when providing care.
The provider had established good systems to monitor the quality of service provided and make improvements where needed. The manager worked with people, staff and other professionals to ensure people achieved good outcomes.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection
The last rating for this service was good (published 22 September 2017)
Why we inspected
This inspection was prompted by a review of the information we held about this service.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.
At the last inspection in June 2015, the service was rated Good.
At this inspection we found the service remained Good.
People remained safe, there were sufficient staff deployed and people experienced continuity of care. Risks to people’s well-being were assessed and risk assessments gave details how to manage these. People were mostly independent with taking their medicines however staff supported them to take these where required.
People continued to receive support from staff that had the right skills and knowledge to support them effectively. People had choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the procedures in the service supported this practice. People were supported to access health professionals when needed and to meet their nutritional needs.
The service continued to provide support in a caring way. People were very complimentary about staff and told us staff were ‘marvellous’. People’s dignity and privacy were promoted. The support people received was led by them and based on people’s choices and wishes.
The service was responsive to people's needs and people received assistance that met their needs and preferences. Staff enabled people to live full lives and continue to be independent. Staff used their knowledge of people’s histories to ensure a sense of well-being for people. People were encouraged to voice their opinions through surveys and spot checks.
The service continued to be well- led by a registered manager and there was a clear staffing structure in place. The provider valued their staff team and ensured opportunities were available to further develop staff. Staff praised the team work, good communication and ways their contribution was recognised. Staff told us they felt listened to and respected. The provider had systems in place to monitor the service provided to people. The registered manager worked to continuously develop and improve quality of the service and people’s experiences.
This inspection took place on 24 June 2015 and we spoke with people who used the service, their relatives and staff on the 23 and 24 June 2015. This was an announced inspection which meant the provider knew two days before we would be visiting. This was because the location provides a domiciliary care service. We wanted to make sure the manager would be available to support our inspection, or someone who could act on their behalf.
There was a registered manager in post at the service at the time of our inspection, however they had recently decided to de-register with us. A manager has been appointed and assisted us during this inspection. The manager told us they had applied for their DBS check and would apply to register as soon as that was returned. 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 registered manager was accessible and approachable. Staff, people who used the service and relatives felt able to speak with the registered manager and provided feedback on the service.
We saw records to show formal complaints relating to the service had been dealt with effectively.
Staff were knowledgeable of people’s preferences and support needs. People told us the regular staff they had provided them with the support they needed and expected.
Staff explained the importance of supporting people to make choices about their daily lives. Where necessary, staff contacted health and social care professionals for guidance and support.
We looked at the care records for fifteen people. They outlined each person’s needs and the support required. People told us they were supported in a range of interests which suited their wishes; this included accessing their local community.
Staff had received regular training in mandatory subjects which was provided face to face by a person employed to provide training to staff. The manager said the effectiveness of training is monitored through the supervision and if necessary disciplinary processes. Each of the seven staff records we saw showed training was up to date. They also included records to show staff received regular supervision of their performance.
All staff were clear about how to report any concerns they had. Staff were confident that any concerns raised would be fully investigated to ensure people were protected. All of the staff we spoke with were knowledgeable about the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005.
We saw where consent had been sought; this was recorded within people's care plans. When a person was unable to consent themselves the person's carer/relative or care manager were involved to ensure the service provided was in the best interests of the person.
People's health and welfare needs were met by support staff. Support staff were appropriately qualified and physically and mentally fit to do their roles.
Systems were in place to monitor the quality of the service provided. Care co-ordinators took responsibility for monthly audits within their team of support workers.
Carer's/relatives we spoke with told us they had never had cause to complain about Alzheimer's support. One carer/relative said 'it's just the opposite and nice to be able to say how excellent they are.'
Everyone we spoke with was complimentary of the staff and the service provided. Comments included 'I couldn't manage without them, I can't say enough about them', and 'they are my first point of call'. We were also told 'They provide a high quality of care, very helpful and good at signposting us to other services.' and 'I have no worries or concerns.'
People told us as relatives they were well supported by Alzheimer's support. One person told us 'should I have any concerns they are always listened to.' Another person said they had been offered one-to-one counselling by the organisation if they needed it.