We carried out a review of the data available to us about Angels Community Support Services 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 Angels Community Support Services, you can give feedback on this service.
People’s experience of using this service:
People supported by the service received personalised care which was responsive to their individual needs. Staff had a good understanding of the care and support people required and provided this with care and patience.
People’s care and support had been planned proactively and in partnership with them. People felt consulted and listened to about how their care would be delivered. Care plans were organised and had identified the care and support people required. We found they were informative about care people had received.
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.
People were supported by staff who had been recruited safely, appropriately trained and supported. People told us their relatives visits were well managed and staff who visited them knew and met their care needs.
People were supported to have access to healthcare professionals and their healthcare needs had been met. The service worked in partnership with other organisations to ensure they followed good practice and people in their care were safe.
Procedures were in place to record safeguarding concerns, accidents and incidents and take necessary action as required. People spoken with during the inspection told us they had no concerns about their relatives safety whilst in the care of staff supporting them.
The service had a complaints procedure which was made available to people and their family when they commenced using the service. The relatives of people supported by the service told us they were happy with their service and had no complaints.
The registered provider used a variety of methods to assess and monitor the quality of the service. These included regular audits and satisfaction surveys to seek their views about the service provided.
Rating at last inspection: Good. (Report published 29 November 2016).
Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the rating at the last inspection.
Follow up: The next scheduled inspection will be in keeping with the overall rating. We will continue to monitor information we receive from and about the service. We may inspect sooner if we receive concerning information about the service.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
This was the first inspection of the service since the initial registration in July 2014 and the move to a new location in October 2015.
Angels Community Support Services is managed from an office in Lytham St Annes. Services are provided to support people to live independently in the community. The agency is a small service offering personal care and support to people living in and around Lytham St Annes.
At the time of our inspection visit Angels Community Support Services provided services to around twenty people. Only seven people received personal care when we inspected. This varied from weekly visits to several times each day.
The registered provider was an individual who also managed the service on a day to day basis. Registered providers 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 they had been visited by the registered provider before their support began and had a thorough assessment of their needs undertaken.
People we spoke with told us they felt safe. We spoke with three people who received support from Angels Community Support Services and a relative. They told us they received safe and attentive care and they liked the staff who supported them. They said staff were punctual and conscientious.
Staff responsible for assisting people with their medicines had received training to ensure they had the competency and skills required.
Staff knew the people they supported and provided a personalised service. People told us they were always supported by staff they knew and who were familiar with their needs and preferences.
There were procedures in place to protect people from abuse and unsafe care. Risk assessments were in place which provided guidance for staff. This minimised risks to people.
Care plans were in place detailing how people wished to be supported. Consent was sought before care was provided and people were involved in making decisions about their care. People were supported to arrange and where needed to attend health appointments and social occasions.
Staff understood the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act (2005) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). Although staff had not needed to make an application when we inspected.
Staff encouraged people to eat when they visited and made sure people’s dietary and fluid intake was sufficient for good nutrition.
People knew how to raise a concern or to make a complaint if they were unhappy with something.
There was a transparent and open culture that encouraged people to express any ideas or concerns. The registered provider sought people’s views and dealt with any issues of quality quickly and appropriately.
Recruitment and selection was carried out safely with appropriate checks made before new staff could start working for the service. This reduced the risk of appointing unsuitable people.
Staff received regular training and were knowledgeable about their roles and responsibilities. They had the skills, knowledge and experience required to support people with their care and social needs.
The registered provider understood their responsibilities. The service had clear lines of responsibility and accountability. People who used the service, relatives where appropriate and staff said they were well supported by the registered provider.
Quality monitoring procedures in place included home visits, telephone monitoring and surveys. People supported by the service confirmed they were regularly contacted and asked for comments about the service they received.