CCT Community Enablement Team

Updated 19 December 2017

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.

This comprehensive inspection took place on 16 and 17 November 2017 and was announced. We gave the service 4 days’ notice of the inspection site visits because some of the people using it could not consent to a home visit from an inspector, which meant that we had to arrange for a ‘best interests’ decision about this.

Inspection site visit activity took place on 16 November 2017. It included visiting people within their homes and also meeting people on pre-arranged visits at the activities they were taking part in within their local communities. We visited the office location on 17 November 2017 to see the registered manager and office staff; and to review care records and policies and procedures.

The inspection team consisted of an inspector and an Expert by Experience on the 16 November 2017. An Expert by Experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service. On the 17 November 2017 the inspector continued the inspection at the provider’s office.

Before the inspection we used information the provider sent us in the Provider Information Return. This is information we require providers to send us at least once annually to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We reviewed other information we held about the home, which included notifications they had sent us. A notification is information about important events which the provider is required to send us by law.

We also contacted County Council commissioners of adult social care services and Healthwatch and asked them for their views of the service provided.

During the inspection we spoke with six people who used the service, four members of the support staff, two new members of staff who were completing their induction, the quality assurance and training manager, specialist provision lead, registered manager and a representative of the provider. We also received feedback from one healthcare professional.

We looked at all or parts of the records relating to five people who used the service as well as staff recruitment records. We looked at other information related to the running of and the quality of the service. This included quality assurance audits, training information for care staff, staff duty rotas, meeting minutes and arrangements for managing complaints.

Updated 19 December 2017

We carried out an announced inspection of the service on 16 and 17 November 2017. CCT Community Enablement Team is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats. It currently provides a service to older and younger disabled adults. Not everyone using CCT Community Enablement Team 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.

The care service has been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen.

A registered manager was present during 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.

CCT Community Enablement Team currently supports 37 people, 18 of which receive some element of support with their personal care. Our inspection and the findings within this report refer only to the 18 people who receive support with personal care. This is the service’s first inspection under its current registration.

People were protected against the risks of experiencing avoidable harm. Staff could identify the potential signs of abuse and knew who to report any concerns to. Regular assessments of the risks to people’s safety were carried out and care plans put in place to enable staff to support people safely. People were supported by an appropriate number of staff who were punctual and stayed for the agreed amount of time. Safe recruitment procedures were in place. People received minimal support with their medicines, but where support was offered, staff did so safely. Assessments of the environment people lived in where carried out to ensure they were safe. Accidents and incidents were regularly reviewed, assessed and investigated by the registered manager.

People’s physical, mental health and social needs were assessed and provided in line with current legislation and best practice guidelines. People were supported by staff who had completed a detailed induction and training programme and had their performance regularly reviewed. Staff felt supported by the registered manager. People received minimal support with their meals but where staff support was needed this was done so effectively. The registered manager had built effective relationships with external health and social care organisations and people’s health was regularly monitored. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service support this practice, however clearer documentation was required to ensure all decisions made clearly evidenced that they were in each person’s best interest.

People felt staff were caring, treated them with respect and dignity and listened to what they had to say. Staff took the time to talk with people and showed a genuine interest in building positive relationships. Staff were knowledgeable about their needs and people were involved with making decisions about their care. People’s diverse needs were respected. People were encouraged to lead as independent a life as possible. People were provided with information about how they could access independent advocates.

People led active and fulfilling lives with the support and dedicated staff. People and their relatives were involved with agreeing the level of care and support people would receive when they started to use the service. Care records contained detailed, person centred guidance that enabled staff to respond to people’s individual preferences. People were treated equally, without discrimination and systems were in place to support people who had communication needs. People felt able to make a complaint and were confident it would be dealt with appropriately.

The service was well led by a dedicated, enthusiastic and caring registered manager who was well liked and respected by all. The provider’s aims and values were respected by staff who in turn provided people with high quality care and support that helped them to improve their lives. The registered manager had a dedicated team of experienced staff who enjoyed working at the service and who carried out their roles with the shared purpose of improving the lives of the people they supported. Representatives of the provider played an active role in driving improvements at the service. There was an open and transparent approach to the service with people and their relative’s views actively requested and acted on. People felt their views mattered. The registered manager and the provider continually looked to improve the service provided and expanded their knowledge by attending locally run forums. Quality assurance processes were in place and these were effective.