Archived: Corby/ Kettering START

There was 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 felt safe having support from the agency in their own home. Staff understood the need to protect people from harm and abuse and knew what action they should take if they had any concerns. Staffing levels ensured that people received the support they required. There were sufficient staff to meet the needs of the people and recruitment procedures protected people from receiving unsafe care from care staff unsuited to the job.

People received care from staff that were supported to carry out their roles to meet the assessed needs of people living at the home. Staff received training in areas that enabled them to understand and meet the care needs of each person.

Care records contained risk assessments and risk management plans to protect people from identified risks and helped to keep them safe but also enabled positive risk taking. They gave information for staff on the identified risk and informed staff on the measures to take to minimise any risks.

People were supported to take their medicines as prescribed. Records showed that medicines were obtained, stored, administered and disposed of safely. People were supported to maintain good health and had access to healthcare services when needed.

People were actively involved in decisions about their care and support needs. There were formal systems in place to assess people’s capacity for decision making under the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Staff ensured people provided consent to the care and support they received.

People received care from staff that were caring and kind. Staff encouraged and supported people in a personalised manner and respected people’s decisions. People were treated with dignity and respect and confidentiality was maintained.

People had care plans in place that ensured people received the care they required. Care was flexible to meet people’s changing needs and staff encouraged people to be as independent as possible. Complaints were responded to effectively.

The service had a supportive and approachable management system. Staff had access to senior staff at all times and suggestions for change were considered and acted upon. The culture within the agency focussed on the same goals to empower people. The provider had policies and procedures in place which were suitable for the needs of the service.

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary is based on our observations during the inspection discussions with people using the service, the staff supporting them and looking at records.

If you wish to see the evidence supporting our summary please read the full report

Is the service safe?

We found that the provider had a system in place for ensuring that incidents and accidents were appropriately investigated to minimise the risk of recurrence.

People were protected against the risks associated with unsafe equipment This was because the service had appropriate arrangements in place to ensure that equipment was suitable for its purpose and properly maintained. We found that people were protected from the risk of infection. This was because the service had effective systems in place to reduce the risk and spread of infection. Staff showed a good understanding of infection control processes.

Is the service effective?

We found that people had been provided with an assessment and their care and support needs had been documented in their individual care plans. This meant that information recorded in their care plans ensured that staff would be able to provide care and support to meet their identified needs.

The service ensured that people were supported and cared for by staff who were appropriately trained to deliver care and support to an appropriate standard. We found that staff had been provided with effective support, induction, supervision, appraisal and training. Staff spoken with were confident in their ability to carry out their role as required. For example, a staff member said, 'The induction training is very good. I get support from my colleagues and they are still mentoring me.'

Is the service caring?

We spoke with 11 people who were being supported by the service. We asked them for their opinions about the staff who supported them. Comments from people were positive. For example, one person said, 'They (meaning care staff) are very good. They provide me with an excellent service.' Another person said, 'Staff are dedicated and well trained.' A further person said, 'Staff are kind and caring and work well as a team.' This demonstrated that people felt that they had developed a caring and positive relationship with the staff who were caring for them.

Is the service responsive?

We found that people's individual needs were regularly assessed to ensure that the care and support provided to them met their diverse needs.

The registered manager took account of complaints and comments and used them to improve on the quality of care provided. People spoken with were aware of how to make a complaint.

Is the service well-led?

Staff spoken with said that regular staff meetings were held and they were listened to and enabled to make suggestions and influence how people's care should be provided. They also said that the registered manager was supportive, approachable and operated an open door policy. It was evident staff felt supported and well-led.

We looked at eight people's files, and spoke over the phone with three of them. Some of the people declined to talk with us as they were unwell. We also spoke with relatives of four other people.

Not all of the people we spoke with were complimentary about the service. The main issue people told us about was not receiving care at the time specified by the provider. One relative told us, 'We asked for an early call, that's between 7.30am and 9.00am. Nine times out of ten it's later than 9.00am, on one occasion V (named person) was still in their nightwear at 11.30 am." Another person told us, 'They come to me four times a day, (and on one occasion) my lunch time call was at 1.30pm, and my tea call was at 3.30, it's just too soon.'

People told us that it was important to them that they had care at regular times. People confirmed that they had been involved in decisions about their care and that care workers had treated them with respect.

We found that care workers had all been through an effective recruitment process.

People were satisfied with the quality of care they received. A relative told us, "They (the carers) did as little as they could for mum, we were happy with that, as they were encouraging her to regain her confidence.'