We carried out a review of the data available to us about HF Trust - Kingston DCA 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 HF Trust - Kingston DCA, you can give feedback on this service.
About the service
HF Trust - Kingston DCA is a domiciliary care agency that provides personal care and support to people living in their own homes and flats. At the time of our inspection, 13 people were receiving personal care and support.
Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also consider any wider social care provided.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
Right Support: Model of Care and setting that maximises people’s choice, control and independence.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
Right Care: Care is person-centred and promotes people’s dignity, privacy and human rights.
Right Culture: The ethos, values, attitudes and behaviours of leaders and care staff ensure people using services lead confident, inclusive and empowered lives.
People and their relatives were complimentary about the care and support provided. Comments included, “I am very content with how the home looks after [person]. Her personal care is excellent” and, “Good staff, easy to talk to and I have found them very helpful.”
People were protected from risk of avoidable harm and abuse. Staff understood their responsibilities to identify and report abuse to keep people safe. Risks were identified and managed which enabled staff to deliver care safely.
Sufficient numbers of staff were allocated and met people’s care and support needs. Relatives told us, “[Person] is always well groomed” and, “[Person] is always well dressed, all her clothes are clean.”
Medicines management complied with best practice and guidance. Infection control and prevention practices and including those associated with COVID-19 were effectively followed to minimise spread of disease and contamination. Staff learnt from incidents and accidents.
People were cared for by staff who were suitably recruited, trained and supported to meet their needs. People received healthcare services when required. A relative told us, “Staff contacted the doctor recently when [person] had an infection and then called me.”
People enjoyed positive and meaningful caring relationships with staff who provided their care. Relatives commented, “[Person] has carers who have his best interest at heart” and, “Everyone seems very cheerful and caring, it’s a very happy house.”
People were supported in a manner that respected their dignity and privacy. A relative commented, “Carers are responsible, easy going, whilst still being professional.” People consented to the care and support provided. Staff encouraged people to undertake tasks they were able to do for themselves, to be as independent as possible and to make choices about their daily living.
People underwent an assessment of their needs and received the support they required. Staff worked closely with healthcare services in a timely manner when people’s health conditions declined. Care and support plans were reviewed to reflect changes to people’s health. The registered manager ensured staff had guidance on how to support people to meet their needs. People knew how to make a complaint when they were unhappy with any aspect of the service.
Checks and audits identified shortcomings to care delivery. Improvements were made when needed. People, staff and relatives said their views about the service were sought and valued.
At the last Care Quality Commission (CQC) inspection in October 2015, the overall rating for this service was Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good. The service demonstrated they continued to meet the regulations and fundamental standards.
People remained safe in their homes. Staff could explain to us how to keep people safe from abuse and neglect. People had suitable risk assessments in place. The provider managed risks associated with people’s homes, to help keep people and staff safe. Recruitment practices remained safe. Medicines continued to be administered safely. The checks we made confirmed that people were receiving their medicines as prescribed by staff qualified to administer medicines.
People continued to be supported by staff who received appropriate training and support. Staff had the skills, experience and a good understanding of how to meet people’s needs. We observed staff gave people time to make their own decisions and gave them the encouragement and support to do so. Staff were providing support in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005. People were supported to eat and drink sufficient amounts to meet their needs. When required staff supported people to access a range of healthcare professionals.
Respondents to our survey said staff were caring, kind and efficient and respected their privacy and treated them with dignity.
People’s needs were assessed before they started to use the service and care was planned and delivered in response to their needs. The provider had arrangements in place to respond appropriately to people’s concerns and complaints.
Staff we spoke with described the management as approachable and easy to get on with. Systems were in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service. The provider had effective quality assurance systems to monitor the scheme’s processes. These systems continue to help ensure people received the care they needed as detailed in their support plans.
This inspection took place on 14 and 15 October 2015 and was announced. We told the provider two days before our visit that we would be coming. At the last inspection on 23 October 2013 the service was meeting the regulations we checked.
HF Trust Kingston Domiciliary Care Agency (DCA) provides care and support for 14 people with learning disabilities, who live in their own homes in the borough of Kingston.
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 told us they felt safe with the support they received from staff. There were arrangements in place to help safeguard people from the risk of abuse. The provider had appropriate policies and procedures in place to inform people who used the service and staff how to report potential or suspected abuse.Staff we spoke with understood what constituted abuse and the steps to take to protect people.
People had risk assessments and risk management plans to reduce the likelihood of harm. Staff knew how to use the information to keep people safe.
The registered manager ensured there were safe recruitment procedures in place to help protect people from the risks of being cared for by staff assessed to be unfit or unsuitable.
Staff received training in areas of their work identified as essential by the provider. We saw documented evidence of this. This training enabled staff to support people effectively.
Appropriate arrangements were in place in relation to administering and the recording of medicines which helped to ensure they were given to people safely.
Staff had a good understanding of their responsibilities in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Staff supported people to make choices and decisions about their care wherever they had the capacity to do so. Where people did not have the capacity to make their own decisions, other professionals and families were involved in making decisions for people that were in the person's best interest.
People chose their meals and were supported to have a varied nutritious diet, to eat and drink well and stay healthy. Staff supported people to keep healthy and well through regular monitoring of their general health and wellbeing.
People were involved in planning the support they received and their views were sought when decisions needed to be made about how they were supported. The service involved them in discussions about any changes that needed to be made to keep them safe and promote their wellbeing.
Staff respected people’s privacy and treated them with respect and dignity. Staff supported people according to their personalised care plans, including supporting them to access activities of their choice.
The provider encouraged people to raise any concerns they had and responded to them in a timely manner. The complaints policy that was provided in an easy read format.
Staff gave positive feedback about the management of the service. The registered manager and senior staff were approachable and fully engaged with providing good quality care for people who used the service. The provider had systems in place to continually monitor the quality of the service and people were asked for their opinions and action plans were developed where required to address areas for improvements.
"Staff listen", "I make decisions" and "I'm not worried about anything" were just a few of the comments from people who use the service. People told us that staff respected their privacy; they said that they made choices about important things in their lives and they felt able to raise any issues.
Relatives' comments included "the service is well run", "staff treat people properly", "they empower them to do things", "the care provided is good" and "we are involved in care planning and reviews".
Care managers reported that the service had "declined over the last year" which they felt was due to a lack of consistency of staff. They said that they were aware of the providers action plan to make the required improvements and said "the right things are being done". One care manager said that they were "kept informed of issues" and said that this was one of the things the service did well.
Support workers told us that they had the training and support they needed to carry out their job. They said some of the things the service did well was provided good care, worked flexibly with people, encouraged them to do their best and gave them opportunities to make decisions in their lives.
We saw that the provider was working through an action plan to improve services provided. The system for notifications needed improving.
People who use the service were happy with the services provided, saying "staff listen", "staff help", "staff maintain my privacy" and that they liked the staff. People said that they felt safe using the service, saying "I would speak to my relative or a member of staff if I was worried about anything".
Support plans seen were person centred and reviewed regularly, giving staff detailed information to help them meet the individuals needs.
Staff told us that it was a good place to work, saying "we respect people", "the service is person centred", "we go into people's homes and support them in the way they want" and "we look to match staff to individuals". Appropriate systems were in place to recruit staff. Staff said they had good access to training, although they had not had regular supervision.