You are here

Filey Care and Support LTD Good

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 8 November 2017

We inspected Filey Care and Support Ltd on 9 and 12 October 2017. The inspection was announced. We gave the provider 48 hours’ notice of this inspection to ensure that the registered manager would be available to support us with this process.

Filey Care and Support Ltd provide personal care and support to people living in their own home as part of a supported living scheme. The service works with people with mild to moderate learning disabilities. At the time of the inspection there were two people using the service.

This inspection was the first inspection of the service since it was registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) on 15 March 2016.

There was a registered manager in post. 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.

One person and relatives we spoke with told us that they were happy with the care and support that they or their relative received. We observed positive interactions between people and staff which promoted person centred care, choice, respect and dignity. Care staff were clearly aware of the needs of the people they supported and how these were to be met.

A number of policies and procedures were available and accessible which related to keeping people safe which included safeguarding people from abuse. Care staff understood the key principles of safeguarding people and the actions they would take if people were subject to or at the risk of harm.

Risk assessments had been completed, which identified and assessed people’s individual risks and provided guidance and direction to staff on how to mitigate or reduce risk in order to keep people safe.

Robust recruitment processes had been followed in order to ensure that staff employed to work with vulnerable people were safe to do so.

Medicines were managed, recorded and administered safely. Appropriate arrangements were in place which ensured that people received their medicines safely and on time.

All staff had received training on the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and staff understood what to do if they had concerns with regards to people's mental capacity. Care staff were able to demonstrate the ways in which they obtained consent from people. They understood the need to respect a person’s choice and decision where they had the capacity to do so.

Care staff confirmed that they had received a comprehensive induction followed by training in specific areas related to their role. Records confirmed that the provider had equipped staff with the skills and knowledge required to deliver good effective care. However, not all staff had been provided with moving and handling training. The provider confirmed that this would be addressed immediately after the inspection.

Care staff told us and records confirmed that they received regular support through supervision. Care staff were yet to receive an annual appraisal as none of them had fully completed a year of employment. Care staff told us that they felt well supported by the registered manager.

Each person had a current care plan in place which contained information about the person and the care and support that they required. These were reviewed every six months or sooner where required. Care plans were person centred and gave care staff pertinent information about the person and how they wished to be supported. However, there was little information available about the person’s background, life history, likes and dislikes. The registered manager and care staff that we spoke to demonstrated that they knew people really well but some important facts had not been recorded within the care plan which would give newly recruited care staff the information they needed t

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 8 November 2017

The service was safe. Care staff were able to describe the different types of abuse, how they would recognise abuse and the actions they would take if abuse was suspected.

Risk assessments identified people�s individual risks associated with their health and support needs. Clear guidance was available on how to mitigate or reduce risk in order to keep people safe.

Appropriate processes and systems were in place which supported people to have their medicines safely.

The provider followed safe and robust recruitment process to ensure that all staff recruited were safe to work with vulnerable people.

Effective

Good

Updated 8 November 2017

The service was effective. Care staff received a comprehensive induction followed by training in specific areas related to the provision of care and support. However, not all staff had received moving and handling training.

Care staff received regular supervision and confirmed that they felt appropriately supported to carry out their role.

The registered manager and the care staff demonstrated a good understanding of the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). People�s care and support needs based on their level of capacity had been appropriately recorded within their care plan.

People were appropriately supported with their dietary needs which took into account any specialist needs that had been identified.

People were supported to access a variety of health and social care professionals as and when required.

Caring

Good

Updated 8 November 2017

The service was caring. Care staff knew the people they supported really well and demonstrated and in depth knowledge and awareness of how they wished to be supported.

People and relatives told us and we observed care staff to be caring with an approach that promoted respect and dignity.

Care plans person centred. People were supported to make informed decisions about the care that they received.

Responsive

Good

Updated 8 November 2017

The service was responsive. Care plans were person centred and gave care staff pertinent information about the person and how they wished to be supported. However, there was little information available about the person�s background, life history, likes and dislikes.

The service had not received any formal complaints since they had begun providing care and support. People and relatives confirmed that they knew the registered manager and felt confident to raise any concerns or issue with the assurance that these would be dealt with appropriately.

The registered manager maintained regular contact with people and their relatives in order to ensure that the quality of care and support was maintained and where concerns were identified these were addressed immediately.

Well-led

Good

Updated 8 November 2017

The service was well-led. People and relatives knew the registered manager and were able to raise any concerns or issues at any time.

The registered manager carried out a number of daily checks in order to monitor the quality of service being provided in order to learn and make improvements. However, these were not formally recorded.

The provider held regular staff meetings which enabled effective communication exchange and encouraged staff to discuss issues and areas for improvement.