Voyage (DCA) Rotherham

Updated 4 September 2019

The inspection:

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection checked whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team:

The inspection was carried out by one inspector.

Service and service type:

The service provides care and support to people living in eleven ‘supported living’ settings, so that they can live as independently as possible. They also provide outreach services for people living with family in the community. People’s care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. CQC does not regulate premises; this inspection looked at people’s personal care and support.

The service had a manager registered with the CQC. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

Notice of inspection:

We gave the service 24 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.

Inspection site visit activity started on 30 July 2019 and ended on 5 August 2019.

What we did:

Prior to the inspection visit we reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. We sought feedback form the local authority and professionals who work with the service. The registered manager completed a provider information return prior to this inspection. This is information we require providers to send us to give some key information about the service, what they do well and improvements they plan to make. This information helps support our inspections.

We visited two supported living schemes and spoke with seven people. During the visits we discussed peoples care plans and medication procedures and systems. We observed staff interactions. We spoke with another person over the telephone to obtain their feedback. We also spoke with three relatives on the telephone and two health care professionals.

We spoke with thirteen staff, including eight support workers, one care co-ordinator, two field care supervisors, the operations director and the registered manager. We looked at documentation relating to four people who used the service, three staff files and information relating to the management of the service.

After the inspection:

We continued to seek clarification from the provider, who sent us the training record and updated us on the arrangements for the West Yorkshire supported living services.

Updated 4 September 2019

About the service:

Voyage (DCA) Rotherham is a domiciliary care agency proving care and support to people in supported living schemes and in their own homes in the community. The service predominantly provides support to younger adults with learning disabilities.

The service has been developed and designed in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes. The principles reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice, and independence. People using the service receive planned and co-ordinated person-centred support that is appropriate and inclusive for them.

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.

On the day of our inspection 48 people were receiving a regulated activity.

People’s experience of using this service:

People were safe. All people we spoke with told us staff made them feel safe. Staff we spoke with understood safeguarding procedures and how to whistle blow if required to ensure any safeguarding concerns were reported. The registered manager monitored accidents and incidents to try to ensure lessons learnt. People were protected by the prevention and control of infection.

Risks were managed to enable people to be as independent as possible. Accidents and incidents were monitored, and lessons were learnt. Medication systems were in place and followed by staff to ensure people received their medicines as prescribed.

We found adequate staff were provided to meet people’s needs. However, in one scheme they were short staffed and permanent staff were covering extra shifts. The provider was actively recruiting to ensure adequate staff were employed. The recruitment process was robust to ensure only staff suitable to work with vulnerable adults were employed.

Staff were very knowledgeable about people needs, care was person-centred and individualised. Staff said training was good and from talking with staff and our observations it was effective. Staff were supervised and supported.

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.

People were supported to be able to receive a balanced diet. People told us they chose their food, but staff supported them. People had access to health care professionals.

When staff engaged with people they were kind, caring and compassionate. People told us the staff were lovely and genuinely cared. People were involved in their care planning to ensure their decisions and choices were reflected.

Staff, people who used the service and health care professionals we spoke with told us the communication was predominantly good. However, we were told in one area the communication could improve, the registered manager had already identified this and was addressing it.

People told us they were supported by the same group of staff, which ensured consistency. However, in one scheme, due to staff shortages this was not always possible. This was being addressed by the registered manager.

The service had a registered manager who conducted a range of audits in areas such as, medicine management, health and safety, care plans and daily records documentation. We found the monitoring was effective. For example, the registered manager had identified the need to improve communication in a service and was addressing this at the time of our inspection.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection:

At the last inspection the service was rated Good (report published 21 February 2017).

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