Background to this inspection
Updated
28 August 2015
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 8 July by one inspector and was announced. The provider was given a short notice period because the location provides a domiciliary care service and we needed to be sure that senior staff would be available in the office to assist with the inspection.
Before the inspection we looked at the provider information return (PIR) which the provider sent to us. 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 also looked at all the information we have collected about the service. The service had sent us notifications about injuries and safeguarding investigations. A notification is information about important events which the service is required to tell us about by law.
During our visit we spoke with six people who use the service. We spoke with the interim manager, regional director and five staff. We also spoke with two local authority social care professionals prior to our visit and with a commissioning officer following our visit.
We looked at seven people’s records and documentation that were used by staff to monitor their care. In addition we looked at four staff recruitment and training files, duty rosters, staff team minutes, complaints and records used to measure the quality of the services.
Updated
28 August 2015
This inspection took place on the 8 July 2015 and was announced.
Radis Community Care (Oak Tree House ECH) is a domiciliary care agency. Support is provided to people living in the Oak Tree House Extra Care Scheme. The service supports people with a range of needs and operates from an office within the housing complex. At the time of the inspection the service was providing personal care to twenty nine people.
There was a registered manager for the service. However, we were told they were on long term leave and that an interim manager was managing the day to day running of the service supported by the regional director. 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.
People told us that they felt safe with staff and would be confident to raise any concerns they had. The provider’s recruitment procedures were robust, medicines were managed safely and there were sufficient staff to provide safe, effective care.
There were procedures in place to manage risks to people and staff. Staff were aware of how to deal with emergency situations and knew how to keep people safe by reporting concerns promptly through processes that they understood well.
Staff received an induction and spent time working with experienced members of staff before working alone with people. Staff were supported to receive the training and development they needed to care for and support people’s individual needs.
People said they felt listened to and were happy with the service provided. They told us that staff treated them with kindness and respected and involved them in decisions about their care.
People’s needs were reviewed regularly. A new format of care plans were being implemented by the service to promote person-centred care. Up to date information was communicated to staff to ensure they could provide appropriate care. Staff contacted healthcare professionals in a timely manner if there were concerns about a person’s wellbeing.
People told us they had been asked for their views on the service and were able to raise concerns and complaints if they needed to. They felt confident that the interim manager would take action if necessary.
The provider had an effective system to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people received. There were various formal methods used for assessing and improving the quality of care. Feedback was sought from people and care records were audited. Complaints were addressed and action taken according to the provider’s policy.
The interim manager had a good knowledge of the Mental Capacity Act (2005) and staff understood their responsibilities in relation to gaining consent before providing support and care.