You are here

Community Support Service (Dom Care) Good

We are carrying out checks at Community Support Service (Dom Care). We will publish a report when our check is complete.


Inspection carried out on 18 April 2016

During a routine inspection

We carried out an unannounced inspection of the Community Support Service (Domiciliary Care) on 18 and 19 April 2016. We made telephone calls to people who used the service and members of staff on 21 April 2016.

Community Support Service (Domiciliary Care) is a community based service providing care and support to people living in their own homes and in three supported living settings. At the time of our inspection, there were eleven people using the service. Eight People lived in three different houses; some houses had been converted into flats where they received around the clock support from staff, and three people lived in their own homes and were supported for no less than two hours every week.

The service has two registered managers in place. 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 were safe using this service. There were risk assessments in place that gave staff guidance on how risks to people could be minimised and how to safeguard people from the risk of possible harm.

People’s care needs had been assessed, and care plans put into place. These care plans were personalised to each individual and took into consideration people’s preferences and choices. Staff supported people to attend health care visits such as GP appointments and hospital visits when required.

Staff were caring and respectful of the people they supported. They had built positive relationships with people and were clearly knowledgeable about people’s needs.

The provider had an effective recruitment processes in place and there were sufficient numbers of staff to safely support people. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities within the service and were trained in meeting people’s needs. They received supervision and support, and gained people’s consent before they provided care or support.

The provider had a formal process for handling complaints and concerns. They encouraged feedback from people and acted on the comments received to continually improve the quality of the service. The provider also had effective quality monitoring processes in place to ensure that they were meeting the required standards of care.

Inspection carried out on 11, 14 September 2013

During a routine inspection

People and their relatives were complimentary about the staff and the care and service they received. A person who used the service said, “They are very nice. They take me shopping. They usually come on time. I enjoy shopping.”

The people who used the service had a learning disability and some had more complex needs. The relatives we spoke with felt very involved in helping to plan their care packages. A relative commented, “They provide a good service. We have the same care worker every time. I get to review and sign the care plan as well.”

Another relative said, “My (relative) loves the staff and enjoys being taken out for activities. The staff are very patient. They allow my (relative) to do things at their own pace. My (relative) is encouraged to do the things that they (the relative) like to do.” This was echoed by another relative who said, “The staff accompanied my (relative) to the care centre, out shopping and to other activities. My relative chose what they like to do. The staff are very encouraging and helpful.”

The members of staff we spoke with had a good knowledge of the people they supported.

We were told that the manager had visited people in their own homes and had checked on the care workers to ensure that people’s care needs had been met appropriately.

Inspection carried out on 4 February 2013

During a routine inspection

People we spoke with told us that they had been treated with respect, and had received the care and support they needed. People said they felt involved in planning their care and support. People confirmed that staff assisted them to access the community and to undertake their daily activities.

People and relatives we spoke with said they were mostly visited by the same support workers. People confirmed that when the support worker had been unable to come, due to exceptional circumstances, such as snow the agency had phoned them to let them know.

We saw evidence that staff had received training and that there were appropriate measures in place to ensure that staff were suitable for the role as support worker. The agency had a complaints procedure in place and people who used the service knew how to complain should the need arise.

Inspection carried out on 10 November 2011

During a routine inspection

The people who use the service and relatives and carers who support them, who gave us their views during telephone interviews between 11 November and 25 November 2011, consistently told us they were provided with a very good service. People described the service they were being provided with as ‘positive’, caring, ‘adaptable’ and ‘flexible’.

People told us about staff supporting them to be active members of the local community by taking them shopping and organising trips and activities of special interest to them.

People told us about the support they receive from staff to enable them to live independently in the community.

People told us feeling part of the wider local support network, provided by Mencap, was important to them and they were kept informed about social events and activities they could take part in.

People told us that the care workers who visit them at home treat them with respect and listen to what they have to say. They told us the care workers and managers keep them informed if there any changes to the timing of their planned visits. People confirmed that new staff were introduced to them before they visited on their own.