• Services in your home
  • Homecare service

J.A.D Direct Limited

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Office 11, 1 Clock Tower Park, Longmoor Lane, Fazakerley, Liverpool, L10 1LD 07881 606781

Provided and run by:
J.A.D. Direct Ltd

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about J.A.D Direct Limited 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 J.A.D Direct Limited, you can give feedback on this service.

25 January 2024

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We expect health and social care providers to guarantee people with a learning disability and autistic people respect, equality, dignity, choices and independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. 'Right support, right care, right culture' is the guidance CQC follows to make assessments and judgements about services supporting people with a learning disability and autistic people and providers must have regard to it.

About the service

J.A.D direct is domiciliary care service supporting people to live independently in their own houses and flats. At the time of our inspection 5 people were in receipt of personal care.

People’s experience of using this service

Right Support

Recruitment of staff was safe and robust. People could choose how they wanted to spend their time, whether they wanted to be in their own rooms or in a shared living space. Staff supported people to take their prescribed medicines and to access healthcare services when needed. People’s individual risk assessments were reflective of the support they were receiving and took additional measures to keep people safe. Audits and checks identified when some improvements were needed to records or processes. People received safe care and they were supported by staff who knew how to protect them from harm.

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

Right Care

People had dedicated 1-1 time to ensure opportunities for social engagement took place. Personal care was delivered in people’s own rooms, to ensure privacy and dignity. People were involved in choices around their care and support and were part of the community.

Right Culture

Staff advocated for people to ensure they had equal access to services, such as healthcare and appointments to follow up on any health concerns. Staff told us they liked working at the service and enjoyed supporting people.

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 20 December 2017)

Why we inspected

This inspection was prompted by a review of information about the service.

This inspection was a focused inspection to review the key questions of safe, and well-led only. For those key questions not inspected, we used the ratings awarded at the last inspection to calculate the overall rating. The overall rating for the service has remained good.

You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the 'all reports' link for J.A.D Direct Ltd on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.

20 November 2017

During a routine inspection

This inspection took place on 20 and 23 November 2017 and was announced.

J.A.D. Direct is a domiciliary care agency that provides support to people with learning disabilities and complex needs in their own homes and communities. At the time of the inspection five people were receiving 24 hour care and support through a model of supported living. One person received care and support from their family home.

At the last inspection, the service was rated Good.

At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

Why the service is rated Good.

The service met all relevant fundamental standards.

The service had robust systems to monitor and improve people’s safety without restricting their independence. Risk was effectively recorded and subject to regular review in conjunction with the person and other stakeholders. Staff were safely recruited and deployed in sufficient numbers to meet people’s needs in a timely manner.

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 were trained to meet the needs of people and supported them to maintain good standards of health and nutrition.

We saw clear evidence that staff knew people well and respected them in the delivery of care and support. People were offered choice and had their independence promoted by the manner in which care was provided. People spoke positively about the approach of the staff and managers.

It was clear from care records and discussions with people that their care needs were met in a personalised way. Each person had different preferences and goals that were reflected in their care records. We saw evidence that staff had been successful in supporting people to achieve their goals. For example, in relation to securing work placements to improve skills and confidence.

People spoke positively about the management of the service and the approachability of senior staff. The service had a clear vision to provide high-quality, person-centred care.

J.A.D. Direct had a robust performance framework which helped to clearly define roles and responsibilities. A substantial and regularly updated set of policies and procedures provided guidance to staff regarding expectations and performance.

We saw evidence that the service worked effectively with other health and social care agencies to achieve better outcomes for people and improve quality and safety. The health and social care professionals that we spoke with were complimentary about the quality and effectiveness of these relationships.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

To Be Confirmed

During a routine inspection

We inspected this service on 14th and 15th January 2015. We gave notice of the inspection the day before the visit. This in line with our methodology for inspecting services of this kind.

There was a registered manager at the service at the time of our inspection. 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.

J.A.D Direct Limited is a domiciliary care agency that is registered to provide personal care to adults living in their own homes. The agency office is located in Aintree, Liverpool.

People who used the service were protected from avoidable harm and potential abuse because the provider had taken steps to minimise the risk of abuse. Clear procedures for preventing abuse and for responding to an allegation of abuse were in place. Staff were confident about recognising and reporting suspected abuse and the registered manager was aware of their responsibilities to report abuse to relevant agencies.

There were appropriate numbers of staff employed by the agency to meet people’s individual needs and lifestyle choices and to keep people safe. Staff recruitment checks were robust and staff were only employed to work at the agency when the provider had obtained satisfactory checks on their suitability.

The registered manager had a good knowledge and understanding of the Mental Capacity Act (2005) and their roles and responsibilities linked to this. They knew about their responsibilities to work alongside family members and relevant health and social care professionals if they needed to consider making a decision for a person in their best interests.

People were provided with care and support that was tailored to meet their individual needs. The service was person centred. This means that the way in which the service is delivered is based on the individual needs of the people who use it.

People who used the service had a support plan which was detailed, personalised and provided clear guidance on how to meet their needs. Risks to people’s safety and welfare had been assessed as part of their care plan and plans to manage any identified risks were in place.

People were well supported to maintain their health and wellbeing. People had been supported to access a range of healthcare professionals as appropriate to their individual needs.

The provider had good processes in place to ensure people were supported appropriately with their medicines. Staff were provided with detailed guidance about how to support people with their medicines and information about what people’s medicines were prescribed for.

Staff presented as caring and we saw that they treated people with respect during the course of our inspection.

Staff were well supported in their roles and responsibilities. Staff had been provided with relevant training and they underwent annual refresher training in a range of topics. Staff attended regular supervision meetings and team meetings.

Staff were aware of their roles and responsibilities and the lines of accountability within the service.

They told us they would not hesitate to raise concerns if they had any. They felt confident that any concerns they did raise would be dealt with appropriately. Throughout our inspection staff demonstrated how they supported the aims and objectives of the service in ensuring it was person centred, inclusive and promoted people’s independence.

Systems were in place to regularly check on the quality of the service and ensure improvements were made. These included regular audits on areas of practice and seeking people’s views about the quality of the service. The registered manager and registered provider were keen to develop the service in response to people’s views and to changes in practice guidance.

7 June 2013

During a routine inspection

People who used the service were able to consent to their care and treatment and staff fully understood and respected this. People told us they had agreed to the contents of their care plans and that they chose how their care and support was to be provided. People's comments included: 'I know about my care plan and have agreed to everything that is in it' and 'I make decisions about my life and staff go along with whatever I want to do'.

We saw that people were involved in the planning and review of their care and support. People were given opportunities to express their wishes and preferences with regards to how their care and support was provided and how they lived their lives.

We found that people had their medication administered at the right times by staff who had received appropriate training. Medication was stored and recorded safely and staff had important information about medication such as why it was prescribed and possible side effects.

People told us they liked the staff who provided their care and support and that the staff knew their needs and met them well. We found that staff had been provided with all the training they needed to do their job and that they were well supported by their manager.

People told us they had access to their records and that they understood them. Staff had a good understanding of record keeping and the importance of ensuring people's confidentiality.

10 January 2013

During a routine inspection

We found people had been involved in decisions made about their care and treatment and that people had been treated with dignity and respect. Comments made by people using the service included:

"I really like the staff, they are helpful and kind".

"The staff listen to me and help me with things I can't do on my own".

People received care and support appropriate to their needs and which ensured their safety.

People had been protected from the risk of abuse and staff were confident about dealing with incidents which may occur. People using the service told us they felt safe in the care of the staff and if they were worried about the way they were treated they would tell somebody.

Strict recruitment procedures had been followed to ensure staff with the right skills, knowledge and experience were employed to work for the agency.

People had been given information about how to complain and they told us they would complain if they needed to. They said they were confident that their complaint would be listened to and dealt with in the right way.

27 February 2012

During a routine inspection

People told us before they decided to use the service they had been given information about it and had an assessment of their needs carried out.

People said they had been involved in making choices and decisions about their lives and the support they had received. They said carers had always listened and respected whatever decisions they made and had been supportive whenever they had had to make difficult decisions.

People told us that they knew about their care plans and had been involved in putting them together. They also told us that they knew were they were kept and could look at them at any time.

People told us they had spent their time doing what they wanted and carers had provided support whenever they needed it.

People told us they had been supported by their carers to attend healthcare appointments such as with their doctor and dentist.

People told us carers had treated them well and with respect and if they were treated badly they would tell somebody right away.

People told us that they knew how to complain and would do if they were unhappy about something. They told us they were sure that their carers would listen to them and sort out any problems they had.