Archived: Tapestry

Updated 13 April 2019

The inspection:

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team:

There was one inspector.

Service and service type:

Tapestry is a domiciliary care agency (DCA). The service provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats in the community. The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided. However, we were informed that they were in the process of leaving the service. A new manager was in post and was applying with us to be the new registered manager.

Notice of inspection:

The manager was given 24 hours’ notice because we needed to be sure that members of the management team were available to assist us with the inspection.

What we did:

¿Prior to the inspection, we reviewed at the information we had about the service as well as the provider. We looked at previous inspection reports and the notifications received by the Care Quality Commission. A notification is information about important events, which the provider is required to tell us about by law.

¿Providers are required to send us key information about their service, what they do well, and improvements plan to make. This information helps support our inspections. The provider had completed a Provider Information Return. We also contacted the local authority to seek their feedback about the provider.

¿During our inspection we spoke with the manager. We looked at three records relating to the care of individuals, three staff recruitment files, medicines administration records, training records and records relating to the running of the service.

¿After the inspection we spoke five people who used the service and three relatives to obtain their views of the service. We also contacted three members of staff to ask them questions about their roles and to confirm information we had received about them during our inspection.

Updated 13 April 2019

About the service:

Tapestry provides care and support to people who live in their own homes. At the time of our visit, they were providing personal care to 23 people.

People’s experience of using this service:

¿People who used the service were protected from the risk of abuse, because the provider had taken reasonable steps to identify the possibility of abuse and prevent abuse from happening.

¿Staff had attended appropriate training. Regular supervision including spot checks and annual appraisals were completed to ensure that staff were supported to deliver safe care to people using the service.

¿There were sufficient numbers of staff to meet people’s needs and safe recruitment practices were in place.

¿There were systems in place to make sure people received their medicines safely. People were supported with their nutritional and hydration needs.

¿People received care and support which was personalised to their wishes and responsive to their needs. Before a person started to use the service, an assessment of their abilities and needs was undertaken. Risk assessments were in place to ensure people’s safety. Regular reviews of people’s care took place.

¿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's preferences, likes, dislikes and diverse needs had been recorded and care and support had been provided in accordance with their wishes. Staff encouraged people’s independence when providing care and support to them. People were supported with a wide variety of their preferred social activities and interests.

¿People and relatives felt the service was run well. Staff also felt supported by the manager. They had a good understanding of the ethos of the service and demonstrated a clear understanding of what was expected of them.

¿There was a range of effective audit and quality assurance procedures in place. These were used as a means of identifying areas for improvement and where good practice had been established. The provider took account of complaints and comments to improve the service.

Rating at last inspection:

Good (report published 22 September 2016).

Why we inspected:

This was a planned inspection based on the rating at the last inspection.

Follow up:

We will monitor all intelligence received about the service to inform the assessment of the risk profile of the service and to ensure the next planned inspection is scheduled accordingly.

For more details, please see the full report which is on CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk.