You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 23 October 2018

We undertook an announced inspection of Casa Doncaster on 1 and 2 October 2018. Casa Doncaster is a domiciliary care service that provides personal care for people living in their own homes in the Doncaster area.

We gave the registered manager short notice that we would be coming because the location provides a domiciliary care service and we wanted the registered manager to assist us in planning visits to people in their homes.

This was Casa Doncaster second inspection since they registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) in October 2016. The last inspection was in October 2017 when the service was rated ‘requires improvement.’ At that inspection we found two breaches of the regulations in relation to staffing and good governance. This was because sufficient numbers of suitably qualified, competent, skilled and experienced persons were not deployed to meet the needs of people who used the service. Also, the systems or processes did not operate effectively to assess, monitor and improve the quality and safety of the service and mitigate risks to the health, safety and welfare of people.

Following the last inspection, we asked the provider to complete an action plan to show what they would do and by when to improve the key questions safe, effective, responsive and well led to at least good.

At this inspection we found that evidence supported the rating of ‘good.’ This was because the provider had addressed the shortfalls we identified at the last inspection.

You can read the report from our last inspections, by selecting the 'all reports' link for ‘Casa Doncaster’ on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

There was a manager at the service who was registered with CQC. 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

Overall people told us they felt safe with the support they received from the staff at Casa Doncaster.

People were protected against the risks associated with medicines because the registered provider and registered manager had appropriate arrangements in place to manage medicines safely. We found some small gaps in the information required to be kept in medicine administration records. This was dealt with on the day of the inspection.

The registered provider had a policy and procedure in place for the safe recruitment of staff.

Most staff told us they felt supported by the registered manager and other senior staff. We found staff were provided with a regular programme of training, supervision and appraisal, which assisted them to deliver effective care.

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.

People's care and support was planned by a multi-disciplinary team of people. People told us they were supported to maintain good health and wellbeing, which included being provided with a nutritionally balanced diet and plenty of drinks.

Staff were caring and compassionate and engaged people in friendly interaction, respecting their preferences and individual likes and dislikes. Relatives told us staff respected people's privacy and dignity and staff could describe how they managed this. People's cultural and religious needs were met by staff at this service.

People told us they could talk to their care workers and the office staff at Casa Doncaster. They said if they had any concerns or worries they were confident staff would listen to them and look at ways of resolving their issues.

There were opportunities for people who used the service, their families, staff and healthcare professionals to become involved in developing the service and they were encouraged to provide feedback about the service provided. This was both on an informal basis speaking to the managers' and through a quality assurance survey.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 23 October 2018

The service was safe.

There were appropriate staffing levels to meet the needs of people who used the service.

Medicines were being managed safely.

Full and thorough recruitment checks were completed for all staff prior to them being offered a position at the service.

Effective

Good

Updated 23 October 2018

The service was effective.

People were cared for by suitably qualified, skilled and experienced staff. Staff were supported through a programme of regular supervision and appraisal.

Staff liaised with other healthcare professionals as required if they had concerns about a person's health.

Staff understood the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and considered people's best interests.

Caring

Good

Updated 23 October 2018

The service was caring.

People were supported by staff that were caring, knew them well and took into consideration their privacy and dignity.

People and their relatives spoke positively about the staff and were happy with the care provided.

Responsive

Good

Updated 23 October 2018

The service was responsive.

Care was provided to people in a person-centred way.

Staff supported people to maintain their interests and continue to be involved in social activities.

There was an effective complaints procedure in place which people were aware of.

Well-led

Good

Updated 23 October 2018

The service was well-led.

Systems for governance were effective.

People benefited from a registered manager who was accessible and approachable.

People who had an interest in the service were asked their opinions and felt listened to.