Background to this inspection
Updated
18 October 2019
The inspection
We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.
Inspection team
This inspection was carried out by two inspectors, and an Expert by Experience. An Expert by Experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.
This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in [their own houses and flats and specialist housing. The service also provides care and support to people living in ‘supported living’ settings, so that they can live as independently as possible. People’s care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. CQC does not regulate premises used for supported living; this inspection looked at people’s personal care and support.
Notice of inspection
The inspection was announced.
We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection. This was because it is a small service and we needed to be sure that the provider or registered manager would be in the office to support the inspection.
What we did before the inspection
We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. We sought feedback from the local authority and professionals who work with the service. We used the information the provider sent us in the provider information return. This is information providers are required to send us with key information about their service, what they do well, and improvements they plan to make. This information helps support our inspections. We used all of this information to plan our inspection.
During the inspection
We spoke with two people and five relatives, three care support workers, the care manager and registered manager who was also the nominated individual. The nominated individual is responsible for supervising the management of the service on behalf of the provider.
We reviewed a range of records. This included five people’s care records, medication records and three staff files in relation to recruitment. We also looked at a variety of records relating to the management of the service including accident and incident records, safeguarding records, complaints, compliments and policies and procedures.
Updated
18 October 2019
About the service
Mofor Solutions is a is a domiciliary care agency and supported living service providing personal care support to people in their own homes. At the time of our inspection, staff were providing personal care to 15 people. This included older people (aged over 65), some of which, were living with dementia, mental health conditions, physical disabilities, learning disabilities or autistic spectrum disorder.
Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also consider any wider social care provided.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
The service applied the principles and values of Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These ensure that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes that include control, choice and independence. The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support by promoting choice and control, independence and inclusion. People's support focused on them having as many opportunities as possible for them to gain new skills and become more independent.
People felt safe with the care staff who supported them, and risks associated with people’s care had been assessed. Care plans confirmed the support people required in accordance with what had been agreed. However, care records were not always fully detailed to support staff in ensuring risks were safely managed. Staff followed safeguarding procedures if they identified any concerns to ensure people were kept safe.
People told us they received their medicines when they needed them.
People were treated with dignity, respect and kindness. Staff knew people well, so they could provide personalised care. People’s preferences for care were recorded in their care plans to ensure they received care and support in accordance with their wishes. People confirmed they received the support as agreed and spoke positively of the caring approach of staff.
Staff recruitment records did not confirm all checks had been completed in accordance with the providers recruitment procedure to demonstrate staff had been recruited safely. There were sufficient numbers of suitably trained staff to support people’s care needs and people told us staff took the time people needed to be supported with their care.
Staff understood their responsibilities to maintain good infection control practice to prevent the spread of infection and people confirmed staff followed good practice when supporting them.
The registered manager completed a range of audit checks to make sure the service ran effectively. These checks had not consistently identified areas needing improvement that we had found such as those linked to care plans, recruitment, medicines and risk management. The registered manager arranged competency checks of staff regularly to make sure they continued to support people safely and appropriately.
Staff worked with other professionals so that people received support when needed. Staff supported people to make contact with health care professionals if required.
People knew how to raise any concerns with the agency if needed and there were quality monitoring systems to enable the provider to have oversight of the service. The registered manager told us of planned changes to ensure going forward areas for improvement were identified more effectively to drive improvement of the service.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection
The last rating for this service was Good (published 5 October 2016).
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.