You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 13 April 2018

The inspection took place between 5 and 9 March 2018 and was announced.

Availl - Bradford 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 both older adults and, younger disabled adults. At the time of the inspection 18 people were receiving personal care from the service.

A registered manager was not 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. A new manager had been in post since October 2017 and was going through the application process to be registered with the Commission.

At the last inspection in December 2016 we rated the provider as ‘Good’ overall and ‘Good’ in each of the individual domains. At this inspection we found the provider had maintained its overall ‘Good’ rating although we identified some minor concerns with the way systems and processes were operated. As a result we rated the ‘Is the service Well Led?’ domain as ’Requires Improvement.’

People provided positive feedback about the care and support they received from Availl. They said they received effective and appropriate care and that staff were kind and compassionate.

People said they felt safe in the company of staff. Systems and processes were in place to help protect people from abuse. Risks to people’s health and safety were assessed and risk assessment documents guided staff to help protect people from harm. The service learned from adverse events to improve the safety of the service.

Overall medicines were managed safely. People received their medicines when they needed them and documentation was kept to record this.

There were enough staff deployed to ensure people received consistently and timely care. Staff were able to arrive on time and stay with people for the allocated amount of time. Safe recruitment procedures were followed to help ensure staff were of suitable character to work with vulnerable people. Staff received a range of training which was relevant to their role.

The service was compliant with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). People’s consent was sought before care and support was offered.

The service worked in partnership with other agencies including health professionals to help ensure people’s needs were met. People’s healthcare needs were assessed and plans of care put in place.

People said staff were kind and caring and treated them well. We saw good positive relationships had developed between people and staff. People received care from a small staff team to enable familiarity between people and staff.

People’s care needs were assessed and clear and detailed plans of care put in place. People said care needs were met and records confirmed this.

People were encouraged to provide feedback and raise any concerns or complaints they had. We saw complaints were dealt with appropriately by the service.

There was a good, person centred culture within the organisation with management and staff committed to providing personalised care and support. People and relatives spoke very highly about the overall quality of the service.

Documentation relating to some aspects of people’s care and support and the management of the service needed improving to consistently evidence that safe systems and processes were being followed. However we did not identify this had an impact on people who used the service and were confident the new management team would address the minor issues raised.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 13 April 2018

The service remains good.

Effective

Good

Updated 13 April 2018

The service remains good.

Caring

Good

Updated 13 April 2018

The service remains good.

Responsive

Good

Updated 13 April 2018

The service was not consistently well led.

Some systems and processes relating to the management of the service needed improving to reduce the risk of inappropriate or unsafe care.

People were very satisfied with the service and said that consistent, high quality care was provided. The service’s culture focused on providing people with personalised care and support.

People were encouraged to provide feedback about the service to help ensure continuous improvement.

Well-led

Requires improvement

Updated 13 April 2018

The service remains good.