You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 29 December 2016

We inspected the service on 3 November 2016 and the inspection was announced. The provider was given 48 hours’ notice of the inspection. This was because the location provides a domiciliary care service. We needed to be sure that the registered manager would be available to speak with us.

Independent Support provides personal care to adults with a variety of needs living in their own homes. This included people with learning disabilities, younger adults, people with a diagnosis of mental health and older people. At the time of the inspection there were eight people using the service.

At the time of our inspection there was a registered manager in place. It is a requirement that the service has a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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 and their relatives told us that they felt safe while they received support from staff at Independent Support. Staff understood their responsibilities to protect people from abuse and avoidable harm and to remain safe. There were procedures in place to manage incidents and accidents.

Risks associated with people’s support had been assessed and reviewed. Where risks had been identified control measures were in place to protect people’s health and welfare.

There were enough staff to meet people’s needs. They were recruited following the provider’s procedures to makes sure people were supported by staff with the right skills and attributes. Staff received appropriate support through an induction and regular supervision. There was training available for staff to provide the support that people needed and to update them on safe ways of working.

People received their prescribed medicines from trained staff who were assessed for their competency to give medicines. Guidance was available to staff on the safe handling of people’s medicines.

People were supported to follow a balanced diet. Guidance from health professionals in relation to eating and drinking was followed. We saw that people chose their own meals and were involved in making them.

People were supported to make their own decisions. Staff and the registered manager had an understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 20015 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. Staff told us that they sought people’s consent before providing support. People were supported to maintain their health and well-being. This included having access to healthcare services such as to their GP.

People were involved in decisions about their support. They told us that staff usually treated them with dignity and respect. We saw that people’s records were stored safely and staff spoke about people’s support requirements in private.

People were supported to develop skills to maintain their independence. Care plans contained information about people, their likes, dislikes and preferences.

People were sometimes not supported by staff who they knew well. They sometimes had to wait for staff to arrive and some people had experienced times when they did not receive support as staff had not arrived.

People and their relatives knew how to make a complaint. The complaints procedure was available, including in an easier to read format, so that people knew the procedure to follow should they have wanted to make a complaint. However, some people felt that their complaints were not listened to.

People and staff felt the service was well managed. The service was led by a registered manager who understood their responsibilities under the Care Quality Commission (Registration) Regulations 2009. Staff felt supported by the registered manager.

People and their relatives had opportunities to give feedback about the quality of the service that they ha

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 29 December 2016

The service was safe.

People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm by staff who knew their responsibilities for supporting them to keep safe.

There were a sufficient number of staff to meet people’s support requirements. They were checked for their suitability prior to starting work.

People received their prescribed medicines from staff who were trained to administer these.

Effective

Good

Updated 29 December 2016

The service was effective.

People received support from staff who had the necessary knowledge and skills. Staff received guidance and training.

People were asked for their consent by staff when offering their support.

People were encouraged to follow a balanced diet. They had access to healthcare services when they required them.

Caring

Good

Updated 29 December 2016

The service was caring.

People were treated with kindness and compassion from staff. Their privacy and dignity was usually respected.

People were involved in making decisions about how their support was delivered.

Responsive

Requires improvement

Updated 29 December 2016

The service was not consistently responsive.

People were sometimes waiting for staff to arrive for their visit. They did not always get support from staff who they saw regularly.

People and their relatives knew how to make a complaint. However, some people felt that their complaint had not been listened to.

People were supported to develop skills to maintain their independence.

Well-led

Good

Updated 29 December 2016

The service was well led.

Staff were supported by the registered manager and knew their responsibilities.

People, their relatives and staff had opportunities to give suggestions about how the service could improve.

The registered manager was aware of their responsibilities and checks were in place to monitor the quality of the service.