We carried out a review of the data available to us about Voyage (DCA) Leicestershire 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 Voyage (DCA) Leicestershire, you can give feedback on this service.
Voyage (DCA) Leicestershire is a domiciliary care agency providing personal care to older and younger adults, living with physical disability, mental health conditions, eating disorders, learning disabilities and autistic spectrum disorder. People are supported in their own houses or in supported living accommodation.
There are eleven supported living properties including shared occupancy houses. There were eighteen people using the service at the time of our inspection. 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.
The service has been developed and designed in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes. The principles reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice, and independence. People using the service receive planned and co-ordinated person-centred support that is appropriate and inclusive for them.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
At the time of our inspection the service did not have a registered manager. However, a new manager was in post and they were supported by the area manager and a mentor who was an experienced registered manager from one of the provider’s other services. Prior to our inspection the manager and management team had identified areas for improvement and had developed an action plan that continued to make good progress. Learning and skill development was actively encouraged, and staff felt confident in their role. The manager worked in partnership with other professionals to strive for good outcomes for people who used the service.
The service was safe. Risk assessments were in place and reviewed regularly to ensure safe care continued. Staff were trained to recognise signs of abuse and knew how to report it. Safe recruitment procedures meant that suitable staff were employed. Medicines were managed safely. Staff used Protective personal equipment (PPE) and good hygiene practices to prevent the spread of infection.
People’s choices, lifestyle, religion and culture as well as their personal and health care needs were all included in the care planning process. People were supported to access health care services, and the service worked in partnership with healthcare professionals. Staff had the knowledge, skills and confidence to do their job. People received care in line with the law and. People’s nutritional needs were met.
Peoples needs were met by good planning and coordination of care. Pre-admission assessments meant the provider was confident they had the right staff available to support people prior to care starting. Regular reviews of care meant the service could respond to changes in people’s needs promptly. End of life care required further development. We have made a recommendation about end of life care.
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. The service applied the principles and values of Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These ensure that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes that include control, choice and independence.
The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support by promoting choice and control, independence and inclusion. People's support focused on them having as many opportunities as possible for them to gain new skills and become more independent.
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 10 November 2016).
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.
Voyage (DCA) Leicestershire provides personal care to adults with a variety of needs living in their own homes. This included people living with learning disabilities or autism spectrum disorder, people with physical disabilities and younger adults. At the time of the inspection there were 47 people using the service.
The service had a registered manager. 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 registered manager was on leave. There was an interim manager in place.
People were protected from the risk of harm because identified risks were managed safely and recruitment checks had taken place. Staff understood what constituted abuse or poor practice and how to report any concerns that they had. The provider dealt with accidents and incidents appropriately and reviewed these to try and prevent reoccurrences.
Where people displayed behaviour that may be deemed as challenging, staff had training and guidance available to them. We found there were enough staff to support people safely during our visit.
People’s equipment was regularly checked and there were plans to keep people safe during significant events such as a fire. The building was well maintained and kept in a safe condition. Evacuation plans had been written for each person, to help support them safely in the event of an emergency.
People’s medicines were handled safely and were given to them in accordance with their prescriptions. People’s GPs and other healthcare professionals were contacted for advice whenever necessary.
Staff received appropriate support through an induction and regular supervision. There was an on-going training programme to provide and update staff on safe ways of working.
People chose their own food and drink and were supported to maintain a balanced diet. They had access to healthcare services when required to promote their well-being.
People were supported in line with the Mental Capacity Act (2005) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). We found that people were supported to make their own decisions. Where people were unable to consent they were supported in their best interest.
People received support from staff who showed kindness and compassion. Their dignity and privacy was protected including staff discussing people in a professional and discreet manner. Staff knew people’s communication preferences.
People were supported to be as independent as they could be. Skills that people had were developed and maintained. Staff knew people’s preferences and had involved people in planning their own support.
People knew how to make a complaint. The provider had a complaints policy in place that was available for people and their relatives. However, some relatives felt that complaints had not been resolved. Complaints had not always been resolved within the timescales in the provider’s procedure.
People and their relatives had contributed to the planning and review of their support. People had support plans that were person centred and staff knew how to support people based on their preferences and how they wanted to be supported. People took part in activities and hobbies that they enjoyed.
The provider had not always notified us of all incidents they were required to report.
The service was led by a registered manager who understood the requirements under the Care Quality Commission (Registration) Regulations 2009.
Systems were in place which assessed and monitored the quality of the service. Areas for improvement had been identified and were being addressed. People and their relatives were asked for feedback about the service.