You are here

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

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 5 December 2017

This announced inspection took place on 26 October and 2 and 3 November 2017. The provider was given short notice because the location provides a domiciliary care service and we needed to be sure that someone would be in. This was Moorcare Devon Limited’ first inspection since registering at a new location.

Moorcare Devon Limited provides personal care and support to people living in their own homes in Tavistock and the surrounding areas. They also provide personal care for up to six people living in a communal setting. At the time of our inspection there were 44 people receiving a service from Moorcare Devon Limited.

When we visited 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.

The service provided safe care to people. One person commented: “Safe, yes very much so.” Measures to manage risk were as least restrictive as possible to protect people’s freedom. People’s rights were protected because the service followed the appropriate legal processes. Medicines were safely managed on people’s behalf.

Care files were personalised to reflect people’s personal preferences. Their views and suggestions were taken into account to improve the service. People were supported to maintain a balanced diet. Health and social care professionals were regularly involved in people’s care to ensure they received the care and treatment which was right for them.

Staff relationships with people were caring and supportive. Staff were motivated and inspired to offer care that was kind and compassionate.

There were effective staff recruitment and selection processes in place. People received effective care and support from staff who were well trained and competent.

Staff spoke positively about communication and how the registered manager worked well with them and encouraged their professional development.

A number of methods were used to assess the quality and safety of the service people received and made continuous improvements in response to their findings.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 5 December 2017

The service was safe.

People said they felt safe. Staff were able to demonstrate a good understanding of what constituted abuse and how to report if concerns were raised.

People’s risks were managed well to ensure their safety.

Staffing arrangements were flexible in order to meet people’s individual needs.

There were effective recruitment and selection processes in place.

Medicines were safely managed on people’s behalf.

Effective

Good

Updated 5 December 2017

The service was effective.

Staff received training and supervision which enabled them to feel confident in meeting people’s needs and recognising changes in people’s health.

People’s health needs were managed well.

People’s rights were protected because the service followed the appropriate guidance in terms of the Mental Capacity Act (2005).

People were supported to maintain a balanced diet.

Caring

Good

Updated 5 December 2017

The service was caring.

People said staff were caring and kind.

Staff relationships with people were caring and supportive. Staff spoke confidently about people’s specific needs and how they liked to be supported.

People were able to express their views and be actively involved in making decisions about their care, treatment and support.

Responsive

Good

Updated 5 December 2017

The service was responsive.

Care files were personalised to reflect people’s personal preferences.

There were regular opportunities for people and people that matter to them to raise issues, concerns and compliments.

Well-led

Good

Updated 5 December 2017

The service was well-led.

Staff spoke positively about communication and how the registered manager worked well with them and encouraged their professional development.

People’s views and suggestions were taken into account to improve the service.

The organisation’s visions and values centred around the people they supported. The values had been embedded in staff practice.

A number of methods were used to assess the quality and safety of the service people received.