You are here

Archived: Blandford Office Good

This service was previously registered at a different address - see old profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 20 December 2018

This inspection took place on 19 and 20 November 2018 and was announced.

Blandford Office is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to 72 people living in their own houses and flats in the community. It provides a service to older people and younger adults some of whom have a physical disability, sensory impairment or dementia.

Not everyone using Blandford Office receives a regulated activity; CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also take into account any wider social care provided.

The service had a registered manager in post. 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’s risks were assessed and control measures put in place. Staff had a good understanding of the risks people faced and how to minimise them. People told us they felt safe and their relatives felt that their loved ones were kept safe.

People were supported by staff who had received safeguarding training and knew how to keep people safe from harm or abuse. Staff were able to confidently tell us how they would report concerns of potential harm or abuse both internally or external to the service if required.

The service had a recruitment and selection process that helped reduce the risk of unsuitable staff supporting people. People received their medicines on time and as prescribed. Staff understood the importance of infection prevention and control and wore personal protective equipment appropriately when supporting people. Accidents and incidents were logged, analysed and the learning from these shared with the team to reduce the chance of them happening again.

People were involved in decisions about their care and subsequent reviews. People were supported by staff who understood the importance of offering choice and support in line with what they needed and wanted. 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 consistently asked for people’s consent before offering to support them. Where people lacked capacity to make particular decisions they were supported by staff who were trained and practiced in line with the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

Staff consistently demonstrated a kind and caring approach towards people. One person told us, “As far as I’m concerned they are very good. They treat me very well.” People’s privacy and dignity was supported at all times. Staff were respectful towards people and knew them well. People were encouraged to maintain their independence. One person said, “I haven’t met anybody that interferes.” The service recognised people’s diversity and was promoting a workshop for staff to increase their awareness of people’s support needs in later life when they do not family.

People were supported in line with their assessed needs. Where people’s needs changed their package of care was amended to reflect this. People felt the service listened to them and made changes to support their requests. People and their relatives knew how to complain and told us they had confidence that any issues would be investigated and resolved to their satisfaction. We saw that complaints had been resolved in line with the service’s policy.

Staff had been trained in providing end of life care and had given support to people and their relatives on these occasions. Feedback from people’s families demonstrated the high regard they had for the support they and their loved ones had received from staff at these times.

There was an open and

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 20 December 2018

The service was safe.

People felt safe. Staff had a good understanding of the risks people faced and how to minimise them.

Medicines were managed safely. People received their medicines as prescribed and on time.

There is a robust recruitment and selection process.

There were enough staff to meet people�s needs and respond flexibly.

Staff have a good understanding of safeguarding and what to do should they suspect or witness abuse or harm.

Effective

Good

Updated 20 December 2018

The service was effective.

People�s needs and choices were assessed and desired outcomes set.

People were supported by staff who supported them in line with the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

Staff receive training and supervision which supports them to meet people�s individual needs confidently and competently.

Staff follow advice from external professionals when required.

Caring

Good

Updated 20 December 2018

The service was caring.

Staff are kind, caring and patient in their approach.

Staff respect people�s privacy and dignity and are supported to recognise their diversity.

People are supported to make decisions by staff who understand the importance of offering choice.

People were encouraged and supported to be as independent as possible.

Responsive

Good

Updated 20 December 2018

The service was responsive.

Although background and life history information are captured at initial assessment this is held in the office rather than in people�s care plans. We have recommended that this is placed in people�s plans in their homes to make it more easily accessible for staff.

People felt listened to and involved in their care.

People and relatives knew how to raise concerns and had confidence that these would be resolved.

Staff had received end of life care training and had received positive feedback on the support they had provided to people and their relatives at this time.

Well-led

Good

Updated 20 December 2018

The service was well-led.

Monthly audits included reviews of people�s care plans, medication administration records, staff files and training.

The registered manager was approachable and was well respected.

Staff feel happy at work and well supported by management.

Staff feel their work is recognised, valued and celebrated.

Communication between staff and management is effective.

People and staff are consulted, and their feedback used to improve the service.