You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 25 October 2018

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection of the service on the 31 July and 1 August 2018. The service was previously inspected in November 2017 and was rated requires improvement overall. At this inspection we found improvements had been made in relation to the management of people’s medication, staff receiving formal supervision

This service is a domiciliary care agency in Grays, Essex. It provides personal care to people living in their own flats within a housing complex benefitting from communal areas. It provides a service to older and younger adults. At the time of our inspection 46 people were using the service.

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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run. The day to day running of the service was undertaken by the service manager who reported to the registered manager daily, as the registered manager also oversaw other services under their registration.

Staff and people spoke very highly of the registered manager and service manager who they informed to be supportive and worked hard to provide an exceptional service. The service had quality monitoring processes in place, however these needed to be embedded to monitor the progress of the service and ensure continued good care delivery.

The service’s recruitment process ensured that appropriate checks were carried out before staff commenced employment. There were sufficient staff on duty to meet the needs of people and keep them safe from potential harm or abuse. People’s health and wellbeing needs were assessed and reviewed to minimise risk to health. People’s medication was managed well and although there was some recording these had not impacted on people negatively and the provider were working to address these.

People were cared for and supported by staff who had received training to support people and to meet their needs. The registered manager had a good understanding of their responsibilities in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. People were supported to eat and drink enough as to ensure they maintained a balanced diet and referrals to health and social care services was made when required.

Staff cared for people in an empathetic and kind manner. Staff had a good understanding of people’s preferences of care. Staff always worked hard to promote people’s independence through encouraging and supporting people to make informed decisions.

Records we viewed showed people and their relatives were involved in the planning and review of their care. Care plans were reviewed on a regular basis and when there was a change in care needs. People were supported to follow their interests and participate in social activities. The service responded to complaints received in a timely manner.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 25 October 2018

The service was safe.

Although minor improvements were required to recording of medication on the correct documents, people were receiving good support with their medications.

People felt safe at the service. The provider�s arrangements ensured that staff were recruited safely, and people were supported by sufficient staff to meet their needs and ensure their safety and wellbeing.

Risk to people living in the service was well managed and people free from risk and harm.

Effective

Good

Updated 25 October 2018

The service was effective.

Management and staff had a good knowledge of the Mental Capacity Act 2005, which helped to ensure people�s rights were protected.

Staff received a suitable induction. People were cared for by staff that were appropriately trained to meet their needs. Staff felt supported in their role.

Caring

Good

Updated 25 October 2018

This service was caring.

Staff were kind and treated people with dignity and respect.

Staff made efforts to seek people�s views about their care and took these into account when planning their care and support.

Staff communicated well with people in a variety of ways.

Responsive

Good

Updated 25 October 2018

The service was responsive.

Care was person centred and met people�s individual needs. Care plans were individualised to meet people�s needs.

There were varied activities to support people�s social care needs. Complaints and concerns were responded to in a timely manner.

Well-led

Good

Updated 25 October 2018

This service was well-led.

The service had quality monitoring processes in place, however this needed to be embedded to monitor the progress of the service.

The service had an open culture where staff and people living in the service were included and encouraged to participate in aspects of running of the service.

The registered manager had developed good links with the local community and local services.

The registered manager provided staff with appropriate leadership and support.