We carried out a review of the data available to us about Domiciliary Care South Devon 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 Domiciliary Care South Devon, you can give feedback on this service.
This inspection took place on 21 and 22 August 2018 and was announced. The provider was given 24 hours' notice because the location was a domiciliary care agency and we needed to be sure that someone would be present in the office.
The service has been developed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. By following these principles, services can support people with learning disabilities and autism to live as ordinary a life as any other citizen.
The service had a registered manager in post. 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 they felt safe and comfortable with the staff that supported them. All of the people we met looked relaxed and happy. When we asked one person if they felt safe with staff they told us, “Yes definitely.” People were protected from the risks of abuse and harm. Staff had received training in safeguarding adults and knew how to recognise signs of potential abuse. They understood how to report any concerns in line with the service's safeguarding policy and were confident any issues would be dealt with thoroughly.
People were supported by kind and caring staff who treated them with dignity and respect. People's individuality was respected and encouraged. Support plans emphasised people's abilities and reminded staff to promote people's independence. Support plans were informative, detailed and reflected people's choices, aspirations and personalities. Each area of the plan reflected how the person wished to receive their care and support, described the person’s skills and the support they needed from staff.
People were supported to live life the way they wanted to, and staff knew people's interests and how they preferred to spend their time. Every element of the care and support that staff provided was focused upon the preferences, aspirations and needs of people using the service. Social needs of people were given as much importance as people's physical needs. Staff recognised that social interaction improved people's wellbeing and promoted a positive emotional response.
Support plans contained person-centred risk assessments. These identified risks and described the measures to be taken to ensure people would be protected from the risk of harm. This supported people to do the things they wanted to live their life fully. Where risks had been identified, management plans were developed to help ensure support staff knew how to support people safely.
Recruitment procedures were robust and records demonstrated the service had carried out checks to help ensure staff employed were suitable for their role. Staff received appropriate training and support to effectively provide safe care and treatment. Newly appointed staff undertook a comprehensive induction programme, shadowed more experienced staff, and did not work alone until managers were confident they had the right skills to carry out their role.
People's rights were upheld because staff displayed a good understanding of the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguarding (DoLS). People were encouraged to make choices and were involved in the care and support they received. Staff told us they would always respect people's decisions.
There was a complaints procedure in place and people knew how to voice their concerns if they were unhappy with the care they received. People's feedback was valued and acted on. There was visible leadership within the service and a clear management structure. The service had an effective quality assurance system in place to help identify areas of improvement and enable the provider to address them promptly.