Topaz Care and Support Company Limited

Topaz Care and Support Limited is a domiciliary care agency located in the London Borough of Barking and Dagenham. It is registered to provide personal care to people in their own homes. The service supports adults aged 18 years and over, and children aged up to 17 years, all of whom may have mental health needs, learning disabilities, physical disabilities and sensory impairments. At the time of the inspection, 13 people, including children, were using the service who 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.

We expect health and social care providers to guarantee people with a learning disability and autistic people respect, equality, dignity, choices and independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ is the guidance CQC follows to make assessments and judgements about services supporting people with a learning disability and autistic people and providers must have regard to it.

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

Right Support

People and relatives told us the service was safe. Safeguarding processes were in place to protect people, including children, from the risk of abuse. The provider recruited staff appropriately and checked they were suitable to support people. Risks to people's health were monitored so staff could support them safely and protect them from coming to harm. People were supported with their medicines. People told us staff were punctual and completed the tasks required to support them. There was a procedure for reporting incidents and accidents in the service and learning lessons to prevent re-occurrence. Infection control procedures helped protect people and staff from the spread of infections. Staff had received training to ensure they had the necessary skills and qualifications to provide support to people. Staff told us they were supported by the management team to perform their roles to the required standard.

Right Care

Assessments of people’s needs were carried out before they started using the service. People's consent to receive care was sought and confirmed. 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. Care plans recorded people’s needs and preferences. However, we have made a recommendation for the provider to ensure care plans that had been developed to support children and young people in the service, were more personalised. People’s nutrition and hydration needs were assessed and monitored so they could be supported safely to maintain a balanced diet. People’s communication needs were assessed and staff were able to communicate with people effectively. Staff supported people to maintain their independence. Details of health professionals involved in people’s care were included in care plans. Staff worked with other professionals to ensure people received the care they needed.

Right Culture

The caring values and ethos of the service helped empower people in their daily lives. People and relatives told us the service was well managed and there was a positive and involving culture. Staff were kind and respectful towards people and their relatives. People’s privacy, human rights and dignity were respected. Their equality and diversity characteristics were understood. They were supported to maintain social connections and attend activities in the community. People and relatives were able to express their views about the care provided. There was a procedure for complaints to be investigated and responded to. Feedback from people and relatives was received and acted upon. There were quality assurance systems in place for the provider to continuously improve the service.

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 the service was good, (published on 21 June 2018).

You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Topaz Care and Support Limited on our website at www.cqc.org.uk

Why we inspected

This inspection was prompted by a review of the information we held about this service.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.

Fortis House, also known as Topaz Care and Support Company Limited, provides care and support to people living in two ‘supported living’ settings, so that they can live in their own home as independently as possible. People’s care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. CQC does not regulate premises used for supported living; this inspection looked at people’s personal care and support.

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. It provides a service to older adults and younger disabled adults. At the time of our inspection four people were 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. Staff were positive about the leadership and culture of the service.

During this inspection we found the service met requirements and is rated Good.

People told us they felt safe using the service. Safeguarding procedures were in place and staff knew how to identify and report safeguarding concerns. Staff knew how to deal with emergencies and report incidents and accidents.

There were arrangements for managing medicines and mitigating risks to people using the service. The provider had robust staff recruitment procedures in place and people received their personal care and support at the time they expected it, by staff who were punctual. There were cover arrangements in place for staff absence.

Staff had a good understanding of infection control procedures and used personal protective clothing such as aprons and gloves when carrying our personal care or meal preparation to prevent the spread of infection.

People’s needs were assessed and care and support was planned and delivered in line with their individual care and support needs. People’s support plans had detailed guidance for staff regarding their preferences.

People told us the service was effective in meeting their needs and carried out an initial assessment to plan their care and support. People using the service had access to healthcare professionals as required to meet their needs. People were supported to meet their nutritional needs.

People made choices for themselves where they had the capacity to do so and the service operated in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

Staff received training and supervision to support them in their role and attended staff meetings to share and receive information.

People told us the service was caring and spoke positively about staff. Staff knew the people they were supporting well, respected their privacy and encouraged independence.

The service had a complaints procedure in place and people knew how to make a complaint. Staff told us they felt supported by the management team. The service had robust systems in place to seek and analyse the views of people using the service. Recordkeeping was up to date and consistent with protecting people’s privacy.

Effective systems were in place to monitor the safety and quality of the service provided. The registered provider upheld all of their responsibilities to the Care Quality Commission (CQC) by submitting statutory notifications, such as serious incidents that had taken place.