We carried out a review of the data available to us about United Response - Kent 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 United Response - Kent DCA, you can give feedback on this service.
Kent DCA is a domiciliary care agency providing supported living to people in their own homes including multi occupancy accommodation and single dwellings in Ashford, Folkestone, Hawkinge, Dover and Maidstone as well as providing outreach support. It provides a service to a range of people including adults who have learning disabilities, physical disabilities and mental health needs.
A domiciliary care agency provides personal care to people living in the community. Supported living settings enable people to live as independently as possible. In supported living, people’s care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. CQC does not regulate premises used for supported living or domiciliary care; this inspection looked at people’s personal care and support. Kent DCA also supported people who did not receive 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.
At the time of our inspection, although the service provided support to 67 people in total, there were 33 people receiving a personal care service we regulate. The support provided aims to enable people to live as independently as possible. Some people required 24-hour support which was provided in supported living accommodation. Many of the people supported by the service had previously challenged traditional services and required bespoke and flexible support packages.
The service was run by a registered manager who was present during our visit. 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. The registered manager of this service oversaw the running of the full service and was supported by managers who were based at the various supported living settings.
At our last full inspection on 11 and 12 January 2016 we rated the service good overall, and in each domain with the exceptions of Safe, rated as requires improvement and Caring, rated as outstanding. We re-inspected the service on 3 March 2017, focusing on the Safe domain. At that inspection, the service was rated as Good. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.
People and their relatives told us they felt safe and comfortable. Staff continued to receive training in how to safeguard people, they were available in sufficient numbers and had received the training required for their role. Thorough checks made sure new staff were suitable to work with people. Medicines were safely managed and people received their medicines as prescribed.
Everyone was extremely positive about the range of activities, events and opportunity for social inclusiveness with the local community. The provider ran an outlook community network resource for people, a donations shop and offered regular opportunities for people to meet and make friends. People were active, went out in their local area and took part in college courses, work experience and community projects.
People were supported to be as independent as possible, including involvement in meal planning, preparation and shopping, as well as keeping their home clean and doing their laundry. 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. People were offered choice, staff understood the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and how to put them into practice.
People were supported to maintain their health, access health services and were given advice about healthy eating.
People benefitted by being supported by staff who were kind, compassionate and valued people’s contributions. Staff knew people well including their preferences and supported people’s individuality and diversity.
Risk assessments continued to detail how people wished to be supported, staff understood how to follow this guidance to meet people's individual needs and keep them safe. People’s end of life wishes were recorded.
A complaints procedure was formats people could understand. People and their relatives were aware of how to make a complaint.
Staff felt well supported by the management team. People and their relatives felt the service was well run. The service worked in partnership with other organisations and sought and acted on their advice to improve outcomes for people. The provider continued to have a quality assurance process in place which included gaining people’s views about the service and how it could be improved.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.
Kent DCA is a service that is registered as a domiciliary service providing supported living to people in their own homes. They support people living in multi occupancy accommodation and single dwellings (such as clusters of flats) in Ashford, Folkestone and Hawkinge as well as outreach support. The service supports adults who have learning disabilities, physical disabilities and mental health needs. Although it supports people with complex health needs, it does not provide nursing care. The support provided aims to enable people to live as independently as possible. At the time of the inspection 31 people were receiving a personal care service although the service provides support to other people as well. Some people required 24 hour support which was provided in supported living accommodation. Many people the service supported had previously challenged traditional services and required bespoke and flexible support packages.
The service had a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the care and has the legal responsibility for meeting the requirements of the law. 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 of this service oversees the running of the full service and is supported by service managers who are based geographically to manage different areas of the service.
People received a service that was safe. Proper procedures were in place to manage medicines, they were safely administered and people received the right medicine at the right time.
Staff and the registered manager had received training about protecting people from abuse, and they knew what action to take if they suspected abuse.
Risks to people's safety had been assessed and recorded with measures put into place to manage any hazards identified. The safety of staff who were working in the community had been assessed and systems were in place to reduce risks to staff.
People received support and assistance from enough staff to fulfil their expected care packages and meet their assessed needs. Staff had received the training they required to meet people's needs including any specialist needs.
Staff had a clear understanding of their roles and people's needs. Staff were supported in their role by the registered manager. Recruitment practices were safe and checks were carried out to make sure staff were suitable to work with people who needed care and support. Staff were managed effectively, policies ensured any poor practice linked to disciplinary procedures if needed.
Kent DCA is a service that is registered as a domiciliary service providing supported living to people in their own homes. They support people living in multi occupancy accommodation and single dwellings (such as clusters of flats) in Ashford, Folkestone and Hawkinge as well as outreach support. The service supports adults who have learning disabilities, physical disabilities and mental health needs. It supports people with complex health needs however it does not provide nursing care. The support provided aims to enable people to live as independently as possible. At the time of the inspection 25 people were receiving a personal care service although the service provides support to other people as well. Some people required 24 hour support which was provided in supported living accommodation. Many people the service supported had previously challenged traditional services and required bespoke and flexible support packages.
The service had a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the care and has the legal responsibility for meeting the requirements of the law. 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 of this service oversees the running of the full service and is supported by service managers who are based geographically to manage different areas of the service.
People told us they received their medicines when they should and felt their medicines were handled safely. However we found shortfalls in some areas of medicine management. Most risks had been assessed and guidance was in place to keep people safe, but not all.
The service provided outstanding care and support to people enabling them to live fulfilled and meaningful lives. People, relatives and professionals were overwhelmingly positive about the service received. Comments included, “I can’t fault it”. “(Family member) has been at their happiest here”. “It all centres around them”.
The service was innovative and used assistive technology to enable people to be as independent as possible. People that had previously required constant staff supervision were able to have privacy and independence with staff accessible nearby. Those that had previously challenged services were able to live their life to their fullest potential.
The leadership and coaching provided by the registered manager and service managers ensured that staff had a full understanding of people’s support needs and had the skills and knowledge to meet them. Training records were up to date and staff received regular supervisions and appraisals. Each member of staff had a personal development plan. The provider worked with other organisations to ensure staff received current and best practice training and information. Staff were very positive about the support they received from their managers and enjoyed working for the provider. All staff demonstrated passion and commitment to providing the best possible care and opportunities for people to live life to the full.
People had positive relationships with their support staff that knew them well and used their shared interests to help people live interesting lives. There were enough staff available to meet people’s needs and people were busy and engaged with their communities. They were supported to make and maintain friendships and relationships that were important to them.
There was a strong emphasis on person centred care. People were supported to plan their support and they received a service that was based on their individual needs and wishes. The service was flexible and responded to changes in people’s needs.
The provider operated safe and robust recruitment and selection procedures to make sure staff were suitable and safe to work with people. People were involved in the recruitment and selection process.
Staff respected people’s privacy and dignity. All interactions between staff and people were caring and kind. Staff were consistently patient, compassionate and they demonstrated affection and warmth in their contact with people, which was reciprocated.
People were involved in the initial assessments and the planning their care and support and some had chosen to involve their relatives as well. Care plans detailed people preferred routines, their wishes and preferences. They detailed what people were able to do for themselves and what support was required from staff to aid their independence wherever possible. People were involved in review meetings about their support and managers used technology and other methods to increase and encourage people’s involvement.
People and their relatives had opportunities to give feedback about the service. Any complaints and feedback were listened to carefully, taken seriously and used to improve services.
The provider had sustained outstanding practice, development and improvement at the service. The provider had achieved awards and accreditation and continued to work in partnership with organisations to develop best practice within the service. Staff were highly motivated and were actively involved in and contributed to continuous development and improvement.
The provider had a strong set of values that wee embedded into staffs practice and the way the service was managed. Staff were very highly motivated and proud of the service. The provider and managers used effective systems to continually monitor the quality of the service and had ongoing development plan for improving the service people received.
We found one breach of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. You can see what action we have asked the provider to take at the end of this report.
We found that people were encouraged to be involved in their own care and that independence was promoted. Relatives told us that people were involved in their care as much as possible. A relative told us that they were "More than happy" with the care provision, that staff were polite and courteous and willing to discuss care plans with people and their relatives.
We saw courteous and kind interactions between people and staff. Relatives told us that the service looked after people who used the service well. People had consistent and familiar teams of staff providing care and support. One relative told us that the staff are "Always someone X knows and this helps X to respond better".
People told us that they felt safe and that their belongings were well looked after.
People and their relatives were happy with the care they received. People and relatives told us that staff understood people's individual needs and that they felt "Staff were well trained".
Relatives we spoke with told us they could express their views about the service freely and that if they had a concern, it would be dealt with promptly.
Staff told us they enjoyed their work, had good access to training and felt supported. A new member of staff told us, 'I am very impressed with the amount of training I have had'. Although staff received regular supervision annual appraisals did not take place consistently. The manager told us this would be addressed.
We found care plans were person centred and regularly reviewed. People we spoke to responded positively when we asked them about their care. A family member told us, 'I have the opportunity to be involved. I am kept up to date my e-mail and through the post'. It was not always evident from documentation that annual reviews took place consistently. However, staff told us records would be improved to demonstrate this.
We saw that Kent Domiciliary Care had established a community network based below their office in Folkestone. We found that people made good use of this facility.