You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 7 June 2017

This inspection took place on 2 May 2016 and was unannounced. Swann House is a domiciliary care service providing support to adults living in their own home.

There was a registered manager in place. 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.

People told us they were happy with the service provided and that the staff were caring, kind and friendly.

Each person had a care plan. However, these did not always contain the amount of detail required to ensure people received consistent care and support. The registered manager had recognised this before our inspection and was addressing the issue. Medicines were managed safely.

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 supported this practice.

Staff had received a range of training that included moving and handling, safeguarding, medicines and health, safety and fire. Other training was available to the staff team specific to people’s needs. Staff told us that the training was good. Staff received supervision sessions.

The service followed safe recruitment procedures. Staff attended an induction prior to working alone in the service. Staff told us that they worked alongside an experienced staff member before working alone. They confirmed the induction process was good and that they had the information they needed to perform their role.

The service had a complaints procedure. No formal complaints had been received but the registered manager fully investigated any minor concerns raised verbally be people and used these as an opportunity for improving the care and support provided.

Quality assurance processes were in place and were being further developed. Audits were undertaken in relation to the service provided and these monitored the services safety and effectiveness.

People were supported to access the local community and avoid social isolation.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 7 June 2017

The service was safe.

People were protected from harm. People had confidence in the service and felt safe.

Risks to the health, safety and wellbeing of people who used the service were appropriately managed.

There were safe recruitment procedures in place and sufficient numbers of staff were available to meet people's care and support needs.

Medicines were managed safely.

Effective

Good

Updated 7 June 2017

The service was effective.

Staff received appropriate, relevant training and induction.

The service worked within the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

People were supported to maintain good health and access healthcare support.

Caring

Good

Updated 7 June 2017

The service was caring.

People who used the service said staff were kind, caring, helpful and friendly towards them.

Staff supported people to maintain their dignity, privacy and independence.

People’s records were kept secure.

Responsive

Good

Updated 7 June 2017

The service was responsive.

People received care and support which met their needs. This was not always fully detailed in the care plan.

People were supported to access the wider community and avoid social isolation.

A complaints procedure was in place. All complaints or concerns were fully investigated.

Well-led

Good

Updated 7 June 2017

The service was well-led.

There was an open and positive culture, which focussed on providing high quality support for people.

Staff were supported and listened to by the manager. They were clear about their responsibilities.

Audits were undertaken and analysed to identify where improvements could be made. Action was taken to implement improvements.