We carried out a review of the data available to us about Right at Home (Nottingham South) 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 Right at Home (Nottingham South), you can give feedback on this service.
Right at Home (Nottingham South) is a domiciliary care agency. They provide personal care support to people living in the community. At the time of the inspection, they supported 23 people with personal care. Right at Home is a UK wide care organisation. We inspected the ‘Nottingham south’ location as each location is registered separately.
People’s experience of using this service:
People told us that they felt safe. Care plans and risk assessments guided staff to support people’s needs safely. This included people with very complex health conditions. People were supported to manage medicine independently where possible. Those people who required medicine support were supported appropriately. The service followed good infection control procedures.
People told us that staff visits were punctual and staff remained in the property for an appropriate amount of time. Records supported this feedback. Safe recruitment procedures were followed to ensure that suitable staff were employed. Once employed, a thorough induction and training programme ensured staff were well skilled to support people.
The service was effective in the way it supported people. People were supported in line with evidence based guidance to ensure their needs were met effectively. People were supported to have a balanced diet and those at risk of weight loss were given appropriate support to manage this. There was strong collaboration with dietician specialists and there was an emphasis on supporting healthy eating.
Staff worked collaboratively within the staff team, and with outside health and social care professionals. This ensured people received effective multi-agency support.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible: the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. Staff had excellent knowledge of how to promote people’s independent decision making.
Everyone we spoke with told us that staff were caring. Staff made an important difference to people’s lives by providing compassionate care designed around people’s individuality. Staff went above and beyond to ensure people were treated compassionately. People were given privacy and treated with dignity.
Care was personalised to people’s preferences. We found personalisation was the ethos behind the service, and one of its key strengths. Staff knew people’s needs very well, and care records reflected this person-centred ethos. Historic complaints and concerns had been listened too. People said that they have not needed to complain, but have faith in the registered manager to listen to them if they did complain.
The service was exceptionally well led. Staff spoke positively about the registered manager and nominated individual’s approach and leadership. It was apparent that the previously rated ‘good’ service had continued to innovate and drive improvement. The clear governance and strong leadership had created improvements at the service. Feedback from people, relatives and professionals was exceptional.
Rating at last inspection:
The last report was published as ‘Good’ (14 May 2016)
Why we inspected:
We last inspected in May 2016, and the inspection was required to ensure the service was still ‘good’. We routinely inspect services rated as ‘good’. This is to ensure the service remains at a good level and care is safe. We had no concerns when we planned this inspection. It was planned in line with our usual timelines.
Follow up:
We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received we may inspect sooner.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
There was a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission (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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
People felt safe and were supported by staff who knew how to keep them safe and understood their responsibilities to protect people from the risk of abuse. Risks to people’s health and safety were managed, but plans in place to identify and reduce the risk to people’s safety did not always contain sufficient detail to inform staff how they should help prevent the risk. There were sufficient numbers of staff to meet people’s care needs and staff were recruited safely. People did not receive the level of support they required to safely manage their medicines.
People were supported by staff who received appropriate induction, training, supervision and a yearly appraisal. Staff were fully supported by management. People’s rights were protected under the Mental Capacity Act 2005. People received the assistance they required to have enough to eat and drink. External professionals were involved in people’s care as appropriate.
People were treated with kindness and compassion and spoke highly of the staff. People reported positive and caring relationships had been developed between themselves and the staff. People felt able to contribute to decisions about their care and were involved in the planning and reviewing of their care and how they wanted their care delivered. People were treated with dignity and respect by staff who understood the importance of this.
People received the care they needed and staff were aware of the support each person required. Care records were written in a person centred way that focused on people’s wishes and respected their views. Care plans provided information for staff so people could receive personalised care. A complaints process was in place and people felt able to make a complaint and felt staff would respond in a timely manner.
The service prompted a positive culture that was person centred, inclusive and open. People and their relatives described communication with the service as excellent and good. Staff felt supported by the management. All staff felt the registered manager was approachable and listened to their views or concerns. People were encouraged to share their experience about the service and feedback on these experiences. There were a number of quality assurance processes in place that regularly assessed the quality and effectiveness of the support provided.