Selby Reablement Service

At the last inspection in August 2015 the service was rated ‘Good’.

This inspection of Selby & District Branch (Domiciliary Care Services) took place on 11 September 2017. There were approximately 17 people receiving the service at the time. At this inspection we found the service remained ‘Good’.

The registered provider was required to have a registered manager in post. The manager had been registered for the last three and a half months. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to manage the service. Like 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 that used the service were protected from the risk of harm by the provider’s systems regarding safeguarding adults. Staff were trained in safeguarding principles and policies and understood their responsibilities. Risks were appropriately removed so that people avoided injury or harm.

The location premises were safely maintained and people’s environments were checked for safety to people and staff, before a package of care was provided. Staffing numbers met people’s needs and provided people with the support they required to recoup from illness or injury. Where further or long-term support was needed people were referred to another service provider. Recruitment of staff followed safe systems to ensure they were suitable. Safe support was given to people, where required, with the management of medicines.

Staff were trained, qualified and their competence was assessed. They received regular supervision and their personal performance was checked at an annual appraisal. Communication was effective.

People’s mental capacity was appropriately assessed and their rights were protected. 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.

Minimal support was provided to people with nutrition, hydration and health care needs, as the aim of the service was to rehabilitate people into independent living following illness or injury.

People told us that staff were caring and extremely helpful and everyone said they wished the service could continue. People were supplied with any information they needed, were fully involved in their care and asked for their consent before staff began to support them with any tasks or care needs. Staff showed respect to people with regard to their wellbeing, privacy, dignity and independence.

People had person-centred support plans in place, which reflected their rehabilitation needs. These were for short-term use and were usually passed over to other service providers if it was assessed that people required longer-term care. All support to people was designed to aid them to become independent once again. A complaint system was available but rarely used because people had no complaints to raise.

The service was well-led. The culture was enabling and the management style was positive. A council-wide system was in place for checking the quality of the service using audits and satisfaction surveys. People’s privacy and confidentiality were maintained with regards to information and records were held securely on the premises.

People who used the service told us they were satisfied with the care and support they had received. They made comments like "What the service provided couldn't be improved. They went the extra mile.' And " All of them are very good.'

People also told us staff supported them in a respectful and dignified manner. They felt that staff worked hard to ensure they were supported in line with their wishes.

We looked at people's care records. We found that records were consistent, accurate and up to date. We also saw that the service delivered the care in a person centred way which meant that they included people in decision making throughout their care.

People were protected against the risks associated with medicines because appropriate arrangements were in place to ensure these were managed in a safe way.

We reviewed the recruitment and selection processes and found them to be robust. This ensured that people were supported by suitably qualified, skilled and experienced staff.

We also confirmed that there was effective leadership and good systems in place to monitor the care, treatment and support people received.