We carried out a review of the data available to us about Hunters Moon 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 Hunters Moon, you can give feedback on this service.
Main Office (Advent Care) provides personal care to people living in their own homes. 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. At the time of our visit, they were providing personal care to 22 people.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People continued to be well cared for and treated with respect and kindness. People's privacy, dignity and independence was promoted and encouraged. Everyone we spoke with were very happy with the compassion and care of the staff looking after them and were satisfied with the service. People told us they felt safe with the staff that came to support them. One person said, “Oh yes. I feel safe – they’re lovely people.”
Potential risks posed to people had been assessed and action taken to reduce the risk. People's safety within their home had been recorded, and referrals were made to the appropriate healthcare professionals to promote people's safety. People received the support they needed to take their medicines.
People were supported by enough staff to keep them safe and meet their needs. People told us staff had enough time to provide care without rushing them. Safe recruitment practices were followed to reduce the risk of unsafe staff working with people. Staff received continuous support, supervision and guidance from the provider and had the skills and knowledge to meet people's needs.
Staff included people in decisions about their care and respected people's rights. 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 received personal care that was tailored to meet their individual needs and wishes. Care plans provided information about how people wished to receive care and support. Whilst some care plans were detailed and person-centred, others would benefit from more information. We made a recommendation about this.
People were encouraged to make decisions about the care and support they received and had their choices respected. People were confident that if they raised any issues, concerns or complaints these would be dealt with effectively by the provider.
The provider had effective systems in place to monitor the quality of care provided and to drive improvements in care. Learning from accidents, incidents and complaints was identified and shared with staff to prevent any reoccurrence. People told us the provider was approachable and responsive, and staff felt supported. People were able to feedback their views 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 6 May 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.
Main Office provides personal care for people in their own homes. At the time of our inspection, there were 33 people receiving personal care from the service. Personal care was provided for people with a range of health conditions often with related physical, mental or learning disabilities.
The registered provider was also the registered manager. 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 very satisfied with the service and the support they received. People had confidence in the staff who supported them. Care staff were familiar to them and knew them well. There were enough staff to provide care and to offer flexibility in the service. The registered manager made sure new staff had a full employment history and obtained recruitment checks before employing them. Staff received training to enable them to deliver effective care. They were supported in their roles by supervision and appraisal.
People received a safe service. We found the service had systems in place to record safeguarding concerns, accidents and incidents and take necessary action as required. Staff had received safeguarding training and understood their responsibilities to provide safe care for people. Risks to people's safety were assessed and reviewed.
Staff understood how consent should be considered in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005. The registered manager understood the requirements of the law and what action to take if they became concerned about a person's ability to make decisions for themselves.
People were offered choices in the meals and drinks staff prepared for them. Staff understood people's dietary requirements and when necessary left snacks or drinks for the person to have later.
People were involved in planning their care and determining how they wished to receive support. They spoke highly of the care they received and of how staff would assist them with additional tasks if necessary. People's care was reviewed and updated in line with their needs and wishes. Where people could benefit from additional support, referrals were made to other healthcare professionals.
People felt able to contact the registered manager or staff if they had concerns and said they received a quick response.
The registered manager monitored the delivery of care and had a system to monitor and review the quality of the service. Suggestions on improvements to the service were welcomed and feedback encouraged.