You are here

This service was previously registered at a different address - see old profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 14 November 2018

We conducted a comprehensive inspection of this service on 01 October 2018. We gave 48 hours’ notice of our intention to visit The You Trust – Fareham office to make sure people we needed to speak with were available. The You Trust Fareham is a domiciliary care agency that provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats in the community [and specialist housing] for adults who are living with a learning disability.

The You Trust - Fareham is a charity which provides a range of social care services, not all of which are regulated by the Care Quality Commission (CQC). At the time of our inspection there were 15 people whose personal care and support came under the scope of this inspection. Not everyone using The You Trust - Fareham receives regulated activity; CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also take into account any wider social care provided.

There were two registered managers’ in post, one was present for the inspection. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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.

People consistently received their medicines on time and as prescribed. People's medicines were safely managed.

People were supported to maintain good health and be involved in decisions about their health. They were provided with personalised care and support. People were positive about the care they received.

Risks to people's and staff safety were identified, assessed and appropriate action was taken. Staff had completed safeguarding adults training and knew how to keep people safe and report concerns.

People were encouraged to make choices about their care and support and to be as independent as possible. People were protected by the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). The MCA provides the legal framework to assess people's capacity to make certain decisions.

People had their needs assessed across a wide range of areas and care plans included guidance about meeting these needs. People were encouraged to make choices about their care and support and to be as independent as possible.

Staff had the knowledge and skills to carry out their roles and their training was updated annually.

People were very positive about the care they received. There were thorough recruitment checks completed to help ensure suitable staff were employed to care and support people.

The Accessible Information standard was understood by the management team. People received care and support which reflected their diverse needs in relation to the seven protected characteristics of the Equalities Act 2010. The characteristics of the Act include age, disability, gender, marital status, race, religion and sexual orientation.

Staff took necessary precautions to prevent the spread of infection. Staff had completed training on infection control and knew where to access the policy.

People felt they would be listened to if they needed to complain or raise concerns. The registered manager’s appropriately investigated complaints, compliments and incidents. People had access to an accessible complaints procedure. A complaints policy was also available to staff and families.

Quality assurance procedures were used to monitor and improve the service for people and included them in developing their care and support. Feedback from people and their relatives or supporters was used to improve the service when their views were sought every year. Monitoring and auditing of systems had ensured action was taken when required.

People's information was kept securely and staff respected people's privacy, dignity and confidentiality.

The regist

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 14 November 2018

The service was safe.

Risks to people had been individually assessed, monitored and reviewed.

Appropriate background checks had been carried out which

ensured staff were safe to work with adults at risk.

Staffing levels were appropriate to meet people's needs.

Medicines were safely managed.

Effective

Good

Updated 14 November 2018

The service was effective.

People were supported to have their assessed needs met by staff that had the necessary skills and knowledge.

Where appropriate people were supported to maintain a healthy diet, and to attend appointments with other healthcare professionals.

People could make informed decisions about how they

wanted to be supported on a day-to-day basis.

Caring

Good

Updated 14 November 2018

The service was caring.

People found their support workers to be kind and supportive and told us they were very happy with the support they received.

People's equality, diversity and human rights were respected at all times.

People's privacy and dignity was maintained.

Relatives spoke very positively about the staff at all levels and were happy with the care.

Responsive

Good

Updated 14 November 2018

The service was responsive.

People's care plans evidenced their care and support needs were delivered to meet their needs.

Regular reviews took place and people were invited to be fully involved in this.

Complaints information was widely available and people knew how to raise a complaint if they needed to.

Well-led

Good

Updated 14 November 2018

The service was well-led.

Quality management systems were in place to ensure

continuous improvement of the service.

People who used the service, relatives and staff told us the

service had effective leadership and they could approach the registered managers’ with any concerns.

Regular staff meetings took place and quality assurance surveys showed positive feedback about the service.

Regular staff meetings took place and quality assurance surveys showed positive feedback about the service.