You are here

Richmond Village Painswick DCA Good

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 16 March 2017

The inspection was unannounced and was carried out by one adult social care inspector. The previous inspection of the service was in August 2014. At that time there were no breaches of the legal requirements.

Richmond Village Painswick DCA provides care and support services to people living in their own ‘purchased’ homes, within the Richmond Village retirement complex. People live in the independent living apartments (ILU) or the assisted living suites (ALU). People pay a monthly service charge and this covers the provision of all meals, or food items to prepare meals plus housekeeping services. At the time of the inspection the service were supporting 20 people, (three people in the ILU and 17 in the ALU), The service had 14 care staff and one team leader.

There was a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service and has the legal responsibility for meeting the requirements of the law; as does the provider.

The registered manager and care staff were knowledgeable about safeguarding issues and knew what to do if there were concerns about a person’s safety. All staff received safeguarding adults training. Robust recruitment procedures were followed to ensure only suitable staff were employed. Appropriate steps were taken to protect people from harm.

Any risks to people’s health and welfare were identified and then managed to either reduce or eliminate the risk. The level of support people needed with their medicines was identified in their care plan. Staff received safe medicines administration training to ensure they were competent to undertake the task. The competency of each staff member was re-checked regularly to ensure they continued to follow best practice.

Care staff had a mandatory training programme to complete which enabled them to carry out their jobs well. They received support from the registered manager and the team leader and were regularly supervised. New staff had an induction training programme to prepare them for their role and then completed the Care Certificate. All care staff had either already completed a qualification in health and social care (formerly called a national vocational qualification), at least at level two, or were working towards the award.

Staff understood the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). The MCA provides the legal framework to assess people’s capacity to make certain decisions. Whilst the arrangements for receiving a service were being put in place, people signed their agreement to the plan of care. Care staff ensured that people consented before any care or support was provided each time they visited.

People were provided with support with meals and drinks where this care and support need had been identified. People may be supported to go to the restaurant to have their meals or the care staff would support them with food and drink preparation in their own home. People were supported to see their GP and other healthcare professionals as necessary.

The care staff had good, kind and friendly working relationships with the people they were looking after. Staff ensured people’s privacy and dignity was maintained at all times.

The service had good processes in place to assess people’s care and support needs and then to plan the delivery of their care. They received the care and support they needed and were looked after in the way they preferred. This was because they were involved in making decisions about how they wanted to be helped. People were encouraged to express their views and opinions and say whether the service was meeting their expectations.

The provider had quality assurance measures in place to monitor the quality and safety of the service. This meant people received the service they expected and it was safe, effective and caring, responsive and well-led. The service used any feedback from people to make improve

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 16 March 2017

The service remains safe

Effective

Good

Updated 16 March 2017

The service remains effective.

Caring

Good

Updated 16 March 2017

The service remains caring.

Responsive

Good

Updated 16 March 2017

The service remains responsive.

Well-led

Good

Updated 16 March 2017

The service remains well-led.