We carried out a review of the data available to us about Adka Independence (East Yorks) Ltd 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 Adka Independence (East Yorks) Ltd, you can give feedback on this service.
This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats in the community. It provides a service to people with a learning disability, physical disability and older adults. This service also provides care and support to people living in ‘supported living’ settings, including three flats and three houses, so that they can live 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.
Not everyone using Adka Independence receives a regulated activity; CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with 'personal care'; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also take into account any wider social care provided. At the time of our inspection 14 people were receiving a regulated activity.
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.
Staff continued to protect people from avoidable harm, were knowledgeable about safeguarding and able to raise concerns. Staff supported people to manage their medicines safely.
People were supported by regular staff which provided continuity of care. Steps had been taken to ensure suitable staff were employed, who were supported in their role and were skilled in providing effective care.
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 communicated with people effectively dependent on their individual needs. Staff knew people well and were able to provide support in a person-centred way. People were supported to maintain their independence and their privacy and dignity were respected.
People’s care plans were kept up to date and reflected their individual needs and circumstances. People were supported to follow their interests and live their lives as they chose to. Staff assisted people to access college, community services and pursue social and leisure activities.
People were able to make a complaint if needed and their feedback was gathered to help drive improvement. Systems were in place to identify shortfalls and ensure quality care was provided. There was a positive culture within the service and people felt managers were approachable.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.
The last inspection was completed on 31October 2013 and the service was found to be compliant with the regulations inspected at that time. This announced inspection took place on 5 January 2016.
The service had a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the CQC to manage the service. Like registered providers they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have a legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
People who used the service were safe. Staff had been trained to protect people from abuse and avoidable harm. Known risks were managed to ensure people were supported safely. People received support from suitable numbers of staff selected by the people who used the service. Staff had been trained to administer medicines safely. The medicines administration records (MARs) we saw were completed accurately.
Staff had completed a range of training to ensure they had the skills and abilities to meet people’s assessed needs. Staff received effective levels of supervision and professional development. People who used the service were encouraged to eat a healthy, balanced diet. When concerns were highlighted with people relevant professionals were contacted for their advice and guidance. Staff supported people to attend healthcare appointments when required.
People had their care and support needs met by caring staff who knew their preferences. During our observations it was clear supportive and trusting relationships had been formed between staff and the people they supported. Staff treated people with respect and helped them to maintain their dignity and levels of independence. Systems were in place to ensure private and sensitive information was stored confidentially.
People were involved with the planning and delivery of their care. People were invited to interview prospective staff and chose the staff who supported them. Care plans and risk assessments were updated as required. A complaints policy and procedure were in place which were provided to people who used the service. We saw evidence complaints were taken seriously by the registered provider and action was taken to improve the service following people’s feedback.
Questionnaires were completed by people who used the service, their relatives and staff, the feedback we saw was consistently positive. A quality assurance system was in place that consisted of audits, checks and feedback. When shortfalls were identified action was taken to improve the level of service. The registered provider was involved in the day to day running and management of the service.