Archived: Radis Community Care (Burton on Trent)

Radis Community Care (Burton on Trent) is a domiciliary care service which is registered to provide personal care to people living in their own homes. 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.

People's experience of using this service and what we found

Relatives told us they felt people were safe and staff knew how to report concerns relating to people's well-being and safety. Risks were assessed and managed to reduce the risk of avoidable harm.

People received their support from a consistent staff team. Systems were in place for the management of medicines and people received their medicines as prescribed. People were protected from the risk of cross infection.

People's needs were assessed and regularly reviewed to ensure their care needs were met. Staff received training relevant to their role and felt supported by the registered manager. Staff sought people's consent before providing care and decisions about people's care and treatment were made in line with law and guidance. People were supported to have 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. People received sufficient amounts to eat and drink to maintain their health. People were supported to access healthcare services when required.

People were supported by a caring and compassionate staff team. People were supported to maintain their

independence and their dignity was respected; they were involved in making decisions about their care.

People and their relatives were involved in the planning and review of their care. Staff used care plans to ensure they provided support in line with people’s wishes. This ensured people received personalised care in line with their preferences and diverse needs. Whilst no one was receiving end of life care, people’s needs had been taken into consideration. People and relatives knew how to complain and felt confident their concerns would be responded to.

People, relatives and staff felt the service was well managed. The registered manager had made

improvements since the last inspection and was aware of their responsibilities. Systems were in place to monitor the service, which ensured people’s known risks were mitigated and lessons were learnt when things went wrong.

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 26 April 2017).

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 reinspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.

We inspected this service on 17 March 2017. This inspection was announced. This meant the provider and staff knew we would be visiting the service’s office before we arrived. There were 54 people in receipt of personal care support at the time of this inspection visit. At our previous inspection on the 29 April 2015 the provider was meeting the regulations that we checked. At this inspection the service continued to meet the regulations that we checked but we identified that improvements were needed.

The service had 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.

Quality monitoring systems were in place but we found these were not always effective. For example the provider was not following their own policy in ensuring all staff received training updates when required. Care staff were transcribing people’s prescribed medicine onto medicine administration records, but no safety checks were in place to ensure any errors in hand written transcripts could be identified. Staff understood the support people needed and worked well with health care professionals to ensure people’s needs were met. However people’s care records were not always updated in a timely way to reflect these changes in support.

People received their calls as agreed and from a consistent staff team. People were protected from abuse as staff understood what constituted abuse or poor practice and their role in reporting concerns. Checks on staff were done before they started work to ensure they were suitable to support people. People were supported to take their medicine when needed.

Staff supported people to make their own decisions. When people were unable to consent, assessments had been undertaken regarding those specific decisions to ensure they were made in their best interests and with the involvement of their family and friends. The delivery of care was tailored to meet people’s individual needs and preferences.

There were approximately 45 people using the service at the time of the inspection. We spoke with seventeen people using the service or their relatives by telephone. We spoke with two staff, and the registered manager in person.

People received safe and appropriate care because their needs were assessed before care was delivered. This ensured the provider could meet people's individual needs.

We were informed people were treated with care and compassion and the staff responded well to their needs.

Staff received appropriate training, supervision and appraisal. People using the service and staff told us there was sufficient training to ensure that people's needs were understood and met.

There were systems in place to monitor the quality of the service.