You are here

Archived: Care Outlook (Battersea) Good

This service was previously registered at a different address - see old profile

This service is now registered at a different address - see new profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 26 May 2017

We conducted an announced inspection of Care Outlook on 12 and 13 April 2017. We gave the provider 48 hours’ notice to ensure the key people we needed to speak with were available. At our last comprehensive inspection on 9 December 2014 we found the provider was meeting the regulations we checked.

Care Outlook provides care and support to people living in their own homes. There were 112 people using the service when we visited.

There was a registered manager at the service. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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.

Risk assessments and care plans contained enough information for care staff. All records were reviewed within six months or sooner if people’s needs changed.

Care staff assisted people to take their medicines safely. Care workers told us they had completed medicines administration training and understood how to safely administer medicines.

Safeguarding adults from abuse procedures were robust and staff understood how to safeguard people they supported. Staff had received safeguarding adults training and were able to explain the possible signs of abuse as well as the correct procedure to follow if they had concerns.

Staff demonstrated a good level of knowledge about their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005. However, care records did not always demonstrate that people were provided with care in accordance with their valid consent.

Staff demonstrated an understanding of people’s life histories and current circumstances and supported people to meet their individual needs in a caring way. Care records contained enough information about people’s needs and preferences.

Recruitment procedures ensured that only staff who were suitable, worked within the service. There was a detailed induction programme for new staff, which prepared them for their role.

Care workers were provided with appropriate training to help them carry out their duties. Care workers received regular supervision and appraisals of their performance. There were enough staff employed to meet people’s needs and visits were appropriately arranged to ensure people’s needs were met.

Care workers supported people to maintain a balanced nutritious diet where this formed part of the package of care being provided to them. People were supported effectively with their health needs, when needed and were supported to access a range of healthcare professionals.

People using the service and staff gave positive feedback about the registered manager and told us they provided feedback about the service. They knew how to make complaints and told us they felt listened to and there was a complaints policy and procedure in place.

The organisation had effective systems in place to monitor the quality of the service. The registered manager reviewed various areas of the service on a regular basis. Information was reported to the CQC as required.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 26 May 2017

The service was safe. Risks to people who use the service were identified and appropriate action was taken to manage these and keep people safe.

Procedures were in place to protect people from abuse. Staff knew how to identify abuse and knew the correct procedures to follow if they suspected abuse had occurred.

There were enough staff available to meet people's needs and we found that recruitment processes helped to ensure that staff were suitable to work at the service.

Medicines were administered safely and records were kept of this.

Effective

Requires improvement

Updated 26 May 2017

The service was not always effective. The service was not always meeting the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). However, care workers demonstrated a good level of knowledge of their responsibilities under the Act.

Staff received an induction, training and regular supervisions and appraisals of their performance.

People were supported to maintain a healthy diet where this formed part of their package of care.

People were supported to maintain good health and were supported to access healthcare services and support when required.

Caring

Good

Updated 26 May 2017

The service was caring. People using the service and their relatives made positive comments about the care provided by staff.

People using the service and relatives told us that care workers spoke with them and got to know them well. People using the service and relatives confirmed their privacy and dignity was respected and care workers gave us practical examples of how they did this.

People using the service and relatives told us care workers spoke to them and got to know them well. Care workers considered people�s emotional needs and dealt with these in a sensitive way.

Responsive

Good

Updated 26 May 2017

The service was responsive. Care records were updated when people�s needs changed and care workers confirmed that they reported any changes to people�s needs to senior staff.

People�s needs were assessed before they began using the service and care was planned in response to these. Care records contained information about people�s preferences in relation to how they wanted their care to be delivered.

Care staff encouraged people to maintain their independence. Care records contained information about people�s social interests and hobbies and how care staff should support people to access these.

People told us they knew who to complain to and felt they would be listened to.

Well-led

Good

Updated 26 May 2017

The service was well-led. Care workers told us senior staff were approachable.

Quality assurance systems were adequate and information was reported to the Care Quality Commission as required.