Background to this inspection
Updated
12 January 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 was planned to check whether the provider is 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.
This inspection took place on 25 and 26 November 2015. The provider was given 24 hours’ notice because the location provides a domiciliary care service and we needed to be sure the registered manager would be available for the inspection. It also allowed us to arrange to visit people receiving a service in their own homes.
Before the inspection, the provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We looked at the information in the PIR and also looked at other information we held about the service before the inspection visit. This was the first inspection since the service was registered with the Care Quality Commission.
The inspection was carried out by one adult social care inspector and an expert by experience. An expert-by-experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses or has used this type of care service.
Way Ahead Care-Support provides personal care to people living in four extra care housing units in Bridgwater and Taunton. They also visit people in their own homes in the Taunton area. At the time of this inspection they were providing personal care for 202 people. We visited eight people in their homes and spoke with eleven people by telephone. We spoke with two relatives during our visits and two over the telephone. We also spoke with eight staff members and the registered manager.
We looked at records which related to people’s individual care and the running of the service. Records seen included twelve care and support plans, quality audits and action plans, three staff recruitment files and records of meetings and staff training.
Updated
12 January 2016
This inspection took place on 25 and 26 November 2015. The provider was given 24 hours’ notice because the location provides a domiciliary care service and we needed to be sure the registered manager would be available for the inspection. It also allowed us to arrange to visit people receiving a service in their own homes.
Way Ahead Care-Support provides personal care to people living in four extra care housing units in Bridgwater and Taunton. They also visit people in their own homes in the Taunton area. At the time of this inspection they were providing personal care for 202 people. They also provided a domestic service to people in their own homes. This was the first inspection since the service was registered with the Care Quality Commission.
There is 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 who received personal care from Way Ahead Care-Support told us they were happy with the care and support provided. They said the manager and staff were open and approachable and cared about their personal preferences and kept them involved in decision making around their care. One person said, “I have improved so much since they have been coming. I am more than happy with all of them. Another person said, “I look forward to their visits. I don’t know what I would do without them.”
People were supported by sufficient numbers of staff who had a clear knowledge and understanding of their personal needs, likes and dislikes. We observed staff took time to talk with people during our home visits. One relative said, “[The person] never says they feel rushed and always tells me they had a lovely chat.” One person said, “There is always someone I know visiting so I get to know them very well.” However some people said they received care from a number of different care workers. One person said, “I have someone different every day but that is alright as I know them all.”
People told us they received care from care workers who were knowledgeable about their needs and were appropriately trained to meet them. Care workers had access to training specific to their roles and the needs of people. For example they could ask the training team to provide specific training in the person’s home if they had new equipment. They understood people’s needs and were able to explain to us how they would care for each person they visited.
People’s care needs were recorded and reviewed regularly with senior staff and the person receiving the care or a relevant representative. All care plans included written consent to care. Care workers had comprehensive information and guidance in care plans to deliver consistent care the way people preferred. One relative said, “They have a very carefully crafted care plan – it is on the end of the bed and in the office. There is a sheet at the end of the bed all about [the person’s] care plan.” Staff members told us they had good guidance in care plans but they always asked the person how they would prefer things done.
There was a corporate philosophy of care for the agency which was to provide a service which was “Individual care for individual people.” There was a commitment to providing care which was tailored to people’s individual wishes. Throughout the inspection we saw this vision was at the very centre of the care and support provided by all the care workers.
People were protected from abuse because the provider had systems in place to ensure checks of new staffs characters and suitability to work with vulnerable adults were carried out. Staff had also received training in protecting vulnerable people from abuse. People said they felt safe when being cared for; we observed people were happy and relaxed with care workers during our home visits.
Most people were able to access health care professionals independently but assistance could be provided if requested. Staff monitored people’s health with their consent and could direct to healthcare professionals as appropriate.
The agency had a complaints policy and procedure that was included in people’s care plans in large print. People said they were aware of the procedure and had numbers they could ring. People and staff spoken with said they felt confident they could raise concerns with the manager and senior staff. Records showed the agency responded to concerns and complaints and learnt from the issues raised.
There were systems in place to monitor the care provided and people’s views and opinions were sought on a daily basis. However some people could not recall completing a survey to express their views. Suggestions for change were listened to and actions taken to improve the service provided. All incidents and accidents were monitored, trends identified and learning shared with staff to put into practice.