You are here

Archived: Ashton Domiciliary Care Agency Good

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

Reports


Inspection carried out on 30 August 2016

During a routine inspection

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 carried out on 13 January 2014

During a routine inspection

At the time of this inspection we were informed that the agency was providing personal care to approximately 27 people. We spoke to five of these people, or their relatives, and four care workers. We also spoke with the manager and the registered provider.

Every one of the people spoken with told us that their care was personalised to their needs and that they were happy with the service they received from the agency. For example, one person said, "They are very nice and efficient. They help me with bathing and general things. I have had the same carer coming recently which is nice as you get to know them and they get to know you".

People told us that care workers respected their wishes with regard to the care they wanted. For example, one person said, "They get down on their knees so they have eye contact and explain things before doing anything. Sometimes it sinks in, other times not. It can take a while but they persevere to try and make sure happy with the care they are going to give". They also told us they had no concerns about the infection control practices undertaken by care workers. Care workers that we spoke with demonstrated understanding in both these areas.

Everyone that we spoke with said that they felt confident that issues would be resolved if raised with management of the agency. For example, one person told us, "I would contact the manager. I have got the telephone number for the office". A relative told us, "I rang the office once and told them I was not happy with something and they sorted it immediately".

The evidence we gained during this inspection supported the comments made by people and their relatives.

Inspection carried out on 19 March 2013

During a routine inspection

At the time of this inspection Mrs. Musk was no longer managing the agency. We had received notification from the provider but had not received an application to deregister from the manager. We spoke with one person and two relatives of people who have used the service. We also spoke with two care workers who were involved in providing care to people. All interviews were carried out by telephone after we had visited the office.

People and their relatives expressed satisfaction with the agency and with the quality of care provided. They confirmed they had been given a copy of their care plan and that they had agreed to the care provided. People also said that care workers treated them with respect and that they felt safe with the care and support they received.

One person told us, "I would say the care provided was very good. A relative told us, "I am more than satisfied with the service. It is second to none!"

Care workers we spoke with confirmed they had received training to ensure they had the skills and knowledge to provide the care required. We looked at a selection of care records. They demonstrated that the planning and delivery of care had been routinely reviewed to ensure they met people's current needs.

Inspection carried out on 14 October 2011

During an inspection in response to concerns

We spoke with some relatives/representatives on the telephone and were given some very positive information.

We were told that communication from the agency and the response by the agency to information or concerns is excellent.

We were told that there is continuity of care, that care workers are known and have built up a relationship with people and that they are always prompt.

In summary one representative told us � we can�t fault them�

We had also been informed about concerns regarding recruitment and training procedures.

We spoke with some relatives/representatives on the telephone and were given some very positive information.

We were told that communication from the agency and the response by the agency to information or concerns is excellent.

We were told that there is continuity of care, that care workers are known and have built up a relationship with people and that they are always prompt.

In summary one representative told us � we can�t fault them�

We had also been informed about concerns regarding recruitment and training procedures.