We carried out a review of the data available to us about Northwest Domiciliary Agency 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 Northwest Domiciliary Agency, you can give feedback on this service.
At the last inspection, the service was rated Good.
At this inspection we found the service remained Good.
People were safe using the services of Northwest domiciliary agency. Recruitment practices and safeguarding policies helped to protect people from harm. Detailed assessments provided good guidance for staff about how health care risks could be minimised and we found medicines were being well managed. This helped to ensure people were kept safe.
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 of the service supported this practice.
Personal development for staff was an important aspect of the organisations ethos. This was supported by detailed induction programmes, regular supervisions, annual appraisals and a varied training schedule for all those who were employed. This helped to ensure the staff team was knowledgeable, competent and confident to deliver the care and support which people needed.
Staff members were kind and caring towards those who used the service. People’s privacy, dignity and independence were consistently promoted. The staff team had received training in relation to equality and diversity. This helped to ensure that everyone was treated equally and were afforded the same opportunities.
Medicines and complaints were being well managed and people were offered appropriate choices at all times. The plans of care were person centred; providing staff with clear guidance about people’s assessed needs and how these needs were to be best met. This helped to ensure people received the care and support relevant to their individual health and social care needs.
Regular audits, surveys and risk assessments had been conducted, so that the quality of service could be closely monitored. This helped to ensure people were receiving the care and support they required. Meetings for staff and service users were held at regular intervals. This enabled people to be involved in decisions about how the service was run.
We always ask the following five questions of services.
Northwest Domiciliary Agency office is situated in a quiet residential area of Ormskirk, West Lancashire. The agency currently provides a supported living service for people with learning disabilities and mental health needs. However, it is registered to also provide personal care within people’s own homes in the community. The service supports people to live as independently as possible. The office is located on the site of a formerly registered care home, which is now a supported living service managed by the domiciliary agency. Pleasant views of the surrounding countryside are enjoyed by those who live in the group home. Limited parking spaces are available at the agency office. However, on road parking is also permitted. Surrounding areas are accessible by public transport, which is within easy reach. Northwest Domiciliary Agency is owned by Potensial North East Supported Living and is regulated and inspected by the Care Quality Commission.
This inspection was conducted on 8 January 2015 by a lead Adult Social Care inspector from the Care Quality Commission. The provider had been given short notice of our planned visit, in accordance with our inspection methodologies of Domiciliary Care services.
The registered manager of the agency was on duty at the time of our inspection. She had been in post for 15 years, although had worked at this service for 25 years. 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.
At the time of this inspection there were three adults using the service, who were sharing supported living accommodation, as tenants of the property, which was located on the same site as the agency office. We were able to visit these people and with their agreement spend some time with them in their own home, chatting about their experiences of receiving a domiciliary support service and finding out what life was like living in a shared environment. We were also able to speak with a relative who was visiting on the day of our inspection, as well as two members of staff and the registered manager of the service.
We received positive comments from everyone we spoke with. We looked at a wide range of records, including the care file of one person who used the service and the personnel record of a staff member. We observed daily activities and looked at how staff interacted with people they supported.
People who used this service were safe. The staff team were well trained and had good support from senior managers. They were confident in reporting any concerns about a person’s safety and were competent to deliver the care and support needed by those who used the service.
Records showed that relevant checks had been conducted to ensure new staff members were suitable to work with this vulnerable client group. Records seen were well maintained, making information easy to find.
The home of those we visited was safe and maintained to a good standard. Good examples were provided of structural changes made, so that people who lived there could experience a more comfortable lifestyle. This helped people to maintain their independence and protect them from harm.
The planning of people’s care was based on an assessment of their needs, with information being gathered from a variety of sources. Evidence was available to demonstrate that people had been involved in making decisions about the way care and support was delivered. This was supported by a robust person centred care planning system.
Regular reviews of needs were conducted with any changes in circumstances being recorded well. Areas of risk had been identified within the care planning process and strategies had been recorded. People’s privacy and dignity was consistently respected. Staff were kind and caring towards those they supported and people who used the service looked comfortable in the presence of staff members.
People who used the service were evidently involved in the choice of menu options and were fully involved in shopping for food and the preparation of meals.
Staff we spoke with told us they received a broad range of training programmes and provided us with some good examples of modules they had completed. They confirmed that regular supervision sessions were conducted, as well as annual appraisals.
Staff spoken with told us they felt well supported by the manager of the agency and were confident in her management style. They felt she maintained a stable management structure, which enhanced the quality of service provided.
People who used the service indicated that they were happy with the service. One of the service users we spoke to told us, "I'm happy here". Another person when asked if they were happy said, "Yes".
We found evidence that there was an effective recruitment process in place and found policies to back the process up.
The provider had an effective system in place to identify, assess and manage risks to the health and safety of people using the service and others.
People's personal records were accurate, fit for purpose and securely maintained. Other records required to be kept were maintained and held securely.