Archived: Friends Together

Updated 28 October 2016

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection checked whether the registered provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

We asked provider to complete a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a document that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We received the completed PIR as requested.

Prior to our inspection we spoke with the local authority to obtain their views of the service. Information received was reviewed and used to assist with our inspection.

This inspection took place on 20 September 2016 and short notice was given. We told the registered manager two working days before our visit that we would be coming. We did this because the registered manager is sometimes out of the office supporting staff or visiting people who use the service. We needed to be sure that the registered manager would be available. This inspection was undertaken by two adult social care inspectors.

As part of this inspection we spoke in person with all three of the people supported by Friends Together. We visited one person in their own home to speak with them and check the Friends Together records held at their home. Two people supported by Friends Together visited the day centre where the office is based so we could speak with them. We spoke over the telephone to a relative of one person supported by Friends Together, to obtain their views of the support provided.

We visited the office and spoke with the registered manager. Three PA’s visited the office base so we could speak with them. In addition, we telephoned three support workers and were able to speak with one of them about their roles and responsibilities.

We spent time looking at records, which included three people’s support plans, three staff records and other records relating to the management of the service, such as training records.

Updated 28 October 2016

Friends Together is registered to provide personal care. Support is provided to people living in their own homes throughout the city of Sheffield. The office is based in the day centre provided by the service in the S6 area of Sheffield, close to transport links.

At the time of this inspection Friends Together was supporting 3 people within the provision of the regulated activity ‘personal care’.

There was a registered manager at the service who was also the registered provider and registered with CQC. 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

This was Friends Together first inspection. The inspection took place on 20 September 2016 and short notice was given. We told the registered manager two working days before our visit that we would be coming. We did this because the registered manager is sometimes out of the office and we needed to be sure that the registered manager would be available. We also wanted to make sure we would be able to meet with or speak to the three people who were receiving personal care.

People supported by the service and their relative’s spoke positively of the personal assistants (PA’s) that supported them. People said they felt safe with their PA’s.

We found systems were not in place to make sure people received their medicines safely.

Risk assessments had not been undertaken to identify and minimise any risks to the person supported.

Full and safe staff recruitment procedures were not in operation to ensure people’s safety was promoted.

Staff were not provided with relevant induction and training to make sure they had the right skills and knowledge for their role. Staff had a good knowledge of the people they were supporting.

Staff were not provided with supervision or appraisal for their development and support.

People supported said the service was reliable because they arranged their schedule directly with their PA’s.

Systems were not in place to ensure staff were familiar with the principles and codes of conduct associated with the Mental Capacity Act 2005 to help protect the rights of people who may not be able to make important decisions themselves.

People had not been provided with a copy of their care plan to keep at their home. The care plans seen at the office base were incomplete and brief. Care plans had not been dated or reviewed to ensure they remained relevant and up to date.

People told us they had not been provided with information on how to make a complaint. Full and detailed complaints records had not been kept. People supported said they could speak with their PA’s if they had any worries or concerns and felt they would be listened to.

There were ineffective systems in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service provided. No checks and audits were undertaken to make sure full and safe procedures were adhered to.

People using the service and their relatives had not been asked their opinion via surveys to identify any areas for improvement. The policies and procedures seen were very brief and did not contain full and relevant information. Records seen were incomplete and held gaps.

We found 11 breaches of seven regulations of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. These were breaches in; Regulation 9: Person centred care, Regulation 11: Need for consent, Regulation 12: Safe care and treatment, Regulation 16: Receiving and acting on complaints, Regulation 17: Good governance, Regulation 18: Staffing and Regulation 19: Fit and proper persons employed.

You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.

The overall rating for this service is ‘Inadequate’ and the service is therefore in ‘Special measures’. Services in special measures will be kept under review and, if we have not taken immediate action to propose to cancel the provider’s registration of the service, will be inspected again within six months.