You are here

Firstchoice Consultancy Ltd Good

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 17 March 2018

This inspection took place on the 19 February 2018 and was announced. At the previous inspection of this service on 1 June 2016 we found two breaches of regulations. This was because care plans were not sufficiently detailed and quality assurance and monitoring systems were not effective.

Following the last inspection, we asked the provider to complete an action plan to show what they would do and by when to improve the key questions of responsive and well-led to at least good. We found the service had taken appropriate action to achieve this and breaches of regulations ad been addressed.

This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats in the community. It provides a service to younger disabled adults. One person was using the service at the time of our inspection.

The service had a registered manager in place. 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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

Appropriate safeguarding procedures were in place. Risk assessments provided information about how to support people in a safe manner. Staff had a good understanding about infection control issues and used protective clothing to help prevent the spread of infection. Lessons were learnt when accidents or incidents occurred to help improve the service. Robust staff recruitment practices were in place and there were enough staff to meet people’s needs.

People’s needs were assessed before they began using the service. Staff received training and supervision to support them in their role. People were able to make choices for themselves where they had the capacity to do so and the service operated in line the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

Staff had a good understanding of how to promote people’s privacy, independence and dignity.

Care plans were in place which set out how to meet people’s individual needs and these were subject to review. The service had a complaints procedure and end of life care procedures in place.

Staff spoke positively about the registered manager. The service had systems in place for seeking the views of people on the running of the service and quality assurance systems were operated effectively. Auditing systems were in place to check records.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 17 March 2018

The service was safe. Appropriate safeguarding procedures were in place and staff understood their responsibility for reporting any safeguarding allegations.

Risk assessments were in place which provided information about how to support people in a safe manner.

The service had enough staff to support people in a safe manner and robust staff recruitment procedures were in place.

Systems were in place to reduce the risk of the spread of infection.

Effective

Good

Updated 17 March 2018

The service was effective. People�s needs were assessed prior to the provision of care to determine if the service was able to meet the person�s needs.

Staff undertook regular training to support them in their role and undertook an induction programme on commencing working at the service.

People were able to make choices about their care and the service operated in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

Caring

Good

Updated 17 March 2018

The service was caring. Staff had a good understanding of how to promote people�s dignity, privacy and independence.

Responsive

Good

Updated 17 March 2018

The service was responsive. Care plans were in place which set out how to meet people�s needs in a personalised manner. Care plans were subject to regular review.

The service had a complaints procedure and end of life care procedure in place.

Well-led

Good

Updated 17 March 2018

The service was well-led. The service had a registered manager in place. Staff spoke positively about the senior staff at the service.

Quality assurance and monitoring systems were in place which including seeking people�s views on the running of the service.