You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 19 September 2018

This inspection took place on 28 August 2018 and was announced. Enable Ability is a registered charity that provides a range of 11 services to both children and adults with a disability in Portsmouth and the surrounding area, including for example, play schemes, Saturday clubs, groups for teenagers and advocacy. One of the many services they offer are befriending services to both children and adults with learning disabilities, physical disabilities and sensory impairments. The service is registered for personal care, which means care provided to a person in the place where the person lives. Although the primary purpose of the befriending services is not the provision of personal care and most activities take place outside of people’s homes, some children or adults may on occasions during their session require either the practical provision of, or the supervision of their personal care whilst at home. At the time of this inspection, the befriending services were supporting 30 adults and 38 children, of whom 20 adults and 16 children received on occasions personal care at home if this was required during their session.

There was a registered manager in post as required. 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.

At our last inspection we found one breach of the regulations in relation to requirements for workers. Following the last inspection, we asked the provider to complete an action plan to show what they would do and by when to improve the key question of safe to at least good. At this inspection we found the required action had been taken to meet this regulation. The provider operated robust recruitment processes.

Processes were in place to protect people from the risk of abuse and risks to people had been assessed. Staff spoken with had a clear understanding of their responsibility to raise any concerns or issues. Processes were in place to ensure trained staff provided people’s medicines where required. The provider had acted to ensure the medicine administration records for the one person they currently support with medicines are returned to the office for storage once complete. Processes were in place to protect people from the risk of acquiring an infection.

People’s care needs had been assessed prior to the commencement of the service and staff were provided with relevant information both within their training and staff handbooks. Staff underwent training that was specifically tailored to the needs of the person or people they befriended. Staff were not generally involved in the provision of or preparation of food for people at home, however where they did provide this care, this was stated in the person’s care plan. Staff supported people when out as required with eating their meals.

Staff worked well across the provider’s services to ensure people experienced a seamless and joined up service. The service was not commissioned to meet people’s day to day health and well-being needs. However, staff worked closely with a range of agencies to ensure people received effective care and ensured any relevant information was shared. 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.

Sessional workers had created meaningful relationships with both children and adults who trusted them and enjoyed spending time with them. Staff used a variety of techniques and communication methods to enable people to express their views about their care. Staff ensured people’s privacy and dignity were upheld.

The service was very responsive to people’s individual needs and the provision of people’

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 19 September 2018

The service was safe.

The provider ensured there were sufficient, suitable staff whose suitability for their role had been assessed prior to their employment.

Systems, processes and practices were in place to protect people from the risk of abuse. Risks to people were assessed and managed.

People�s medicines were managed safely, and the provider has acted to ensure medicine records are returned to the office once completed.

Effective

Good

Updated 19 September 2018

The service was effective.

People�s needs had been assessed and the planning of their care took into account legislative requirements and good practice guidelines.

Staff had the skills and knowledge to meet the needs of the people they has been allocated to befriend.

People�s consent had been sought and legal requirements met. The registered manager has acted to record these decisions more clearly.

Caring

Good

Updated 19 September 2018

The service was caring.

People were treated with kindness and compassion by staff.

Staff enabled people to express their views and to make decisions about their support.

Staff ensured people�s privacy, dignity and independence were upheld.

Responsive

Good

Updated 19 September 2018

The service was responsive.

The service was responsive to people�s individual needs and the planning and provision of people�s befriending sessions was highly personalised.

People were supported to pursue interests and activities which they wanted to do.

People and their representatives were able to raise any concerns or complaints if they needed to and any issues raised had been addressed for people.

Well-led

Good

Updated 19 September 2018

The service was well-led.

There was a positive and open culture within the service.

People, staff and the community were engaged with the service.

Processes were in place to monitor the quality of the service.