• Services in your home
  • Homecare service

Anchor Domiciliary Care

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

126 High Street, Strood, Rochester, Kent, ME2 4TR (01634) 297777

Provided and run by:
Anchor Support Services Limited

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about Anchor Domiciliary Care on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.

This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.

If you have concerns about Anchor Domiciliary Care, you can give feedback on this service.

22 October 2018

During a routine inspection

Anchor Domiciliary Care provides a care and support service primarily to people with learning disabilities and autism. At the time of the inspection it was providing support 41 people. The service is a domiciliary care agency and also provides care and support to people living in several 'supported living' settings. A domiciliary care agency provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats in the community. Supported living settings enable people to live as independently as possible. In supported living, people’s care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. CQC does not regulate premises used for supported living or domiciliary care ; this inspection looked at people’s personal care and support. Anchor Domiciliary Care also supported people who did not receive a regulated activity; CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’’ help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also take into account any wider social care provided.

The service was run by a registered manager and they were present at our visit. 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.

At our last inspection on 14 March 2016 we rated the service good. At this inspection on 22 and 24 October we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

People and their relatives told us they felt safe and comfortable. Staff continued to receive training in how to safeguard people.

Everyone was extremely positive about the range of activities and events on offer. The provider ran clubs for people and offered regular opportunities for people to meet and make friends. People were active, went out in the local area and took part in college courses and work experience.

Staff continued to be available in sufficient numbers and had received the training they required for their role. New staff were checked to make sure they were suitable to work with people.

People were supported to be as independent as possible which included being involved in household activities such as keeping their home clean, meal planning and preparation and doing their laundry.

The provider had acted on professional advice with regards to the management of medicines to make sure people received their medicines as prescribed.

Staff understood the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and how to put them into practice.

People were supported to maintain their health, access health services and were given advice about how to eat healthily.

People benefitted by being support by staff who were kind, compassionate and valued people’s contributions. Staff knew people well including their preferences and supported people’s individuality and diversity.

Changes had been made to care plans so that they were more user friendly. Assessments of risk continued to detail how people wished to be supported and staff understood how to follow this guidance to meet people's individual needs and keep them safe.

People had been supported at the end of their lives to have a comfortable death, with people who mattered to them.

The provider had a complaints procedure in place which was written in a format that people could understand. People who used the service and their relative were aware of how to make a complaint.

Staff felt well supported by the management team. People and their relatives said the service was well run. The service worked in partnership with other organisations and sought and acted on their advice to improve outcomes for people. The provider continued to have a quality assurance process in place which included gaining people’s views about the service and how it could be improved.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

14 March 2016

During a routine inspection

We inspected the service on the 14 March 2016. This inspection was unannounced.

Anchor domiciliary care provides services for younger adults and older people, including people with learning, autism and physical disabilities. They provide personal care to people in their own home and also support people in the community. The service provides care for people in and around the Medway area. There were 20 people receiving support to meet their personal care and community support needs. They also provide support to 50 people who received support to access the community, who do not require personal care.

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.

People were protected against the risk of abuse. All staff were trained and recognised the signs of abuse or neglect and what to look out for. Both the registered manager and staff understood their role and responsibilities to report any concerns and were confident in doing so.

Risk assessments were detailed and gave staff guidance about any action staff needed to take to make sure people were protected from harm.

Effective recruitment processes were in place and followed by the registered manager. Staff had received training relevant to their roles. Staff had the opportunity to discuss their performance during one to one supervision meetings and had an annual appraisal that discussed their future development and possible further vocational training.

There were suitable numbers of staff available to meet people’s needs. People’s planned care was allocated to members of staff at appropriate times.

People were supported to access the community regularly. People were also supported and helped to maintain their health and to access health services if they needed them.

People told us staff were kind, caring and communicated well with them. People’s information was treated confidentially. Paper records were stored securely in locked filing cabinets.

Procedures, training and guidance in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) was in place which included steps that staff should take to comply with legal requirements.

People’s view and experiences were sought through review meetings and through surveys. People’s views about the service they received were positive.

People were supported to be as independent as possible. People told us that the service was well run. Staff were positive about the support they received from the registered manager. They felt they could raise concerns and they would be listened to.

Audit systems were in place to ensure that care and support met people’s needs.

Communication between staff within the service was good. They were made aware of significant events and any changes in people’s support needs.

4 November 2013

During a routine inspection

People told us that staff from the agency had visited and assessed their care needs before the service to them commenced. One relative said, 'They talked to me about my needs and they often ask me if I need any more support'.

People we spoke with told us that they were happy with the service provided and that staff were reliable and punctual. People said that staff were respectful and caring. One person said, 'Yes, the carers are very good and excellent in fact.

We were told that spot checks regularly took place regarding staffs practice to make sure that people who used the service were happy. People told us that they knew who to go to if they had any concerns, but that they had no concerns.

Comments from people who used the service included: "The carers are reliable', "They are really good" and 'They are so helpful'

We found that care plans were reviewed on a regular basis and information was clearly documented.

There was a policy and process in place for ensuring that staff were trained, supervised and appraised yearly.

Systems were in place to make sure people received a high quality service as it had been agreed.

Comments and complaints people made were responded to appropriately.

22 January 2013

During a routine inspection

We spoke to six people who used the service. Everyone one spoken with was very pleased with the service they received. We had a large number of very positive comments and they included; 'the staff are cheerful and helped me find my job at the charity shop', 'the staff treat me with respect, they let me make my own choices' and 'staff are there to help me, and they are always very kind.'

People told us that the communication had been very good at the agency. They were kept informed about who would be visiting and were usually updated when this changed. We were told the staff were punctual and they were contacted if for any reason the care worker would be late.

We found that the staff had received training and were able to support people taking medication in a safe manner.

We found the staff had been recruited in a way that made sure that vulnerable adults would be protected. New staff also undertook induction training to make sure they had the skills and knowledge to provide care to people with differing needs. The agency also had systems in place to monitor the quality and safety of the care and support they provided.

13 October 2011

During a routine inspection

People told us that someone from the agency had visited them before the service commenced. They said they were treated with dignity and their privacy was respected by staff. People told us that they had the help that they needed. People said that the staff were very kind and helpful. One person said 'staff at Anchor are brilliant'.