You are here

Archived: Mencap - West Suffolk Domiciliary Care Agency Good

This service is now registered at a different address - see new profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 26 January 2017

Mencap - West Suffolk Domiciliary Care Agency provides domiciliary care and support to 85 people with learning disabilities in their own homes. However at the time of the inspection only 55 people received the regulated activity of personal care. The service is provided at 15 different supported living schemes in West Suffolk and to people living in their own homes within the community.

We inspected the offices on 12 December 2016 and telephoned people, their relatives and staff for their feedback about the service on 13 December 2016. We gave 48 hours’ notice before the inspection to make sure that some people who used the service, staff members and the management team were available to talk with us. At our last inspection on 21 January 2014, the service was found to be meeting the required standards in the areas we looked at.

There was a manager in post who had registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC). A registered manager is a person who has registered with the 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run. The registered manager was supported by service and assistant service managers responsible for the day-to-day operation of each location where people received care and support.

People told us that staff helped them stay safe, both where they lived and when supported out and about in the community. Staff had received training in how to safeguard people from abuse and were knowledgeable about the potential risks and how to report concerns.

Robust recruitment practices were followed and there were sufficient numbers of suitable staff available at all times to meet people’s support needs. Plans and guidance were in place to help staff deal with unforeseen events and emergencies in a safe and effective way. People were supported to take their medicines safely and at the right time by trained staff. Potential risks to people’s health and well-being were identified, reviewed and managed effectively.

People who received support, relatives and health care professionals were positive about the skills, experience and abilities of staff employed at the service. Staff received training relevant to their roles and had regular one to one meetings with managers to discuss and review their personal development and performance.

People were encouraged and helped to maintain good health and had access to health and social care professionals when necessary. They were also supported to eat a healthy balanced diet that met their individual needs.

Staff obtained people’s agreement to the support provided and always obtained their consent before helping them with personal care. Staff supported people in a kind and caring way that promoted their dignity. Staff had developed positive relationships with the people they supported and where clearly very knowledgeable about their needs and personal circumstances. At the time of our inspection we found that the provider was working within the principles of the MCA where it was necessary and appropriate to the needs of the people they supported.

People who received support, and their relatives wherever possible and appropriate, were involved in the planning and reviews of the care provided. People were helped to learn and acquire life skills which made them more independent and able to move on to live independently.

People received personalised care and support that met their needs and took account of their preferences. Staff were knowledgeable about people’s background histories, preferences and routines. People were supported to pursue social interests and take part in meaningful activities relevant to their needs.

Relatives told us that managers and staff listened to them and responded positively to any concerns they had. People were encouraged to raise any concerns they had and

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 26 January 2017

The service was safe.

People were helped to stay safe by staff who were trained to recognise and respond effectively to the potential risks of abuse.

Safe and effective recruitment practices were followed to ensure that all staff were suitable for the roles they performed.

Sufficient numbers of staff were available to meet people�s support needs at all times.

People were helped to take their medicines safely by trained staff.

Potential risks to people�s health were identified and managed effectively.

Effective

Good

Updated 26 January 2017

The service was effective.

Staff obtained people�s agreement and consent before support was provided.

Staff were trained and skilled to meet people`s need effectively. They felt supported by managers to carry out their job roles effectively.

People were supported to eat a healthy balanced diet that met their needs.

People�s health needs were met and they were supported to access health and social care professionals when necessary.

Caring

Good

Updated 26 January 2017

The service was caring.

People were supported in a kind and compassionate way by staff who knew them well and were familiar with their needs.

People and their relatives were involved in the planning and review of their care needs.

People were supported in a way that promoted their dignity and respected their privacy.

The confidentiality of personal information had been maintained.

Responsive

Good

Updated 26 January 2017

The service was responsive.

People received personalised support that met their needs and took account of their preferences and personal circumstances.

People`s care plans offered sufficient guidance for staff to provide personalised care and support.

People were helped and supported to pursue social interests and take part in meaningful activities relevant to their needs.

People and their relatives knew how to raise concerns and were confident these would be dealt with appropriately.

Well-led

Good

Updated 26 January 2017

The service was well led.

Effective systems were in place to quality assure the services provided, manage risks and drive improvement.

Relatives, staff and health care professionals were very positive about the managers and how the service was operated.

Staff understood their roles and responsibilities and were well supported by the management team.