You are here

Archived: Ashton Domiciliary Care Agency Good

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 21 September 2016

Ashton Domiciliary Care Agency provides care for people in their own homes. On the day of our visit the service was providing personal care to 24 people with a range of needs including older persons, people with mental health issues and those living with dementia.

The service had a registered manager. 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People, and their relatives, said they felt safe with the staff. There were policies and procedures regarding the safeguarding of adults. Staff were aware of the correct procedures to follow if they considered someone was being neglected or poorly treated.

People received a reliable service from regular staff. There were sufficient numbers of suitably experienced staff employed to meet people’s needs. Thorough recruitment processes were in place for newly appointed staff to check they were suitable to work with people who may be at risk.

People were supported by staff to take their medicines and this was recorded in their care records. Checks were carried out to ensure staff were competent to administer medicines and that staff were following the correct procedures.

Each person had a care plan which gave guidance to staff on supporting people safely. Risks to people were assessed and recorded. These included environmental assessments for people’s homes so staff knew any risks and what they should do to keep people and themselves safe.

There was suitable training, support and induction for staff so they could support people effectively. Staff told us they received regular training and that they had a good induction before they started to provide support to people.

People told us their care workers obtained their consent when providing care and support. Staff had received training in the Mental Capacity Act (MCA)) 2005 and associated legislation. There was information in the staff handbook to guide staff if they thought a person lacked capacity to consent.

People were supported to eat and drink in line with their individual needs. The agency supported people to access healthcare professionals when needed.

People were supported by staff who were kind and caring. People were able to express their views and said they were encouraged to be independent as possible. People said they were treated with dignity and respect. A complaints procedure was in place that enabled people to raise concerns.

People said their needs were regularly reviewed and they were contacted on a regular basis to ensure that their current up to date needs were being met.

The provider had a policy and procedure for quality assurance. The manager and senior staff carried out checks to monitor the quality of the service provided. Quality assurance surveys were sent out to people, relatives and staff each year by the provider to seek their views on the service provided by Ashton Domiciliary Care Agency.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 21 September 2016

The service was safe.

Potential risks to people were identified and managed. Risk assessments were in place and reviewed to help protect people from harm. Staff were aware of the procedures to follow regarding safeguarding adults.

There were sufficient numbers of staff to meet the needs of people safely.

Suitable recruitment checks were carried out so the provider could be assured that staff were suitable to work with people.

Effective

Good

Updated 21 September 2016

The service was effective.

Support and training to staff was provided so staff had the skills required to support people effectively. Staff completed a structured induction to equip them with the skills to work with people. This included a period of �shadowing� more experienced staff.

People told us staff provided a good standard of care which they had agreed to. Staff were trained in the Mental Capacity Act 2005 so they would know what to do if people did not have capacity to consent to care.

Staff were aware of how to support people to receive a healthy diet. People were supported to access health care services when needed and staff worked with health care professionals to provide coordinated care to people.

Caring

Good

Updated 21 September 2016

The service was caring.

People were involved in decisions about the type of support they received and the provider listened to what people had to say about their care.

People said they were treated well by staff and that they were kind and caring. Staff said they always treated people with dignity and had respect for the people they cared for.

Responsive

Good

Updated 21 September 2016

The service was responsive.

People received care and support that was personalised and responsive to their individual needs and interests.

Care plans gave staff information to provide support for people in the way they preferred. Plans were regularly reviewed and updated to reflect people�s changing preferences and needs.

There was an effective complaints procedure which people, and their relatives, were aware of. Complaints were investigated and responded to appropriately.

Well-led

Good

Updated 21 September 2016

The service was well led.

There was a registered manager in post who was approachable and communicated well with people, staff and outside professionals.

People, relatives and outside professionals were asked for their views about the service through a survey organised by the provider so the quality of the service provided could be monitored.

The registered manager carried out a range of audits to monitor the quality of the service provided to people and to make any improvements.