You are here

Oaklands Park Domiciliary Care Service Good

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 21 October 2013
Date of Publication: 6 November 2013
Inspection Report published 06 November 2013 PDF

Staff should be properly trained and supervised, and have the chance to develop and improve their skills (outcome 14)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Are safe and their health and welfare needs are met by competent staff.

How this check was done

We looked at the personal care or treatment records of people who use the service, carried out a visit on 21 October 2013, observed how people were being cared for and talked with people who use the service. We talked with staff and reviewed information sent to us by commissioners of services.

Our judgement

People were cared for by staff who were supported to deliver care and treatment safely and to an appropriate standard. The training and supervision of staff was of a good standard which meant that staff were able to meet the needs of the people the service supported.

Reasons for our judgement

Staff received appropriate professional development. The service’s staffing structure had undergone significant change over the past year to bring it into line with current expectations for supported living services. Previously voluntary live-in workers (co-workers) had held the role of ‘house-parent’ within people’s homes at Oaklands Park. At the time of the inspection the co-worker role had gone and all staff were employed by the provider to carry out the regulated activity and other support services.

The staff training record (training matrix) showed that a programme of induction, mandatory and specialised training was in place for staff. Staff received mandatory training in all relevant areas including moving and handling, infection control, first aid, fire, risk assessment, medication, safeguarding, the mental capacity act, equality and diversity and food hygiene. Specific training to meet the needs of people who used the service was also provided. This included managing challenging behaviour, autism, dementia, epilepsy and effective communication. Our discussions with the registered manager demonstrated that care had been taken to select the most appropriate and good quality training. For example, the dementia training was a two day course run by the Alzheimer’s Society and other courses were British Institute of Learning Disabilities (BILD) accredited.

The service’s performance improvement plans (PIP), drawn up with the local authority, demonstrated that some staff were undertaking further relevant qualifications. Although there were some gaps in the training matrix, for example, in moving and handling training, we were assured that the majority of training had been completed and these gaps would be addressed. The registered manager told us that they had decided to use the local authority training matrix but this had yet to be implemented. This change meant that it would be easier to identify when training updates were due as the current system required dates to be checked manually.

We saw that staff received regular supervision including observation of their practice. These sessions were documented and it was clear from these records that any actions arising in supervision were followed up by the registered manager in a timely fashion. Our conversations with staff and people who used the service indicated that the support and training provided to staff was beneficial. For example, one staff member told us about autism training, which had helped them to understand the person’s perspective. Staff were able to access managers for support when this was needed. One staff member said managers were, “Very prompt at getting back to us”. All the staff we spoke with told us they felt supported. People who used the service said that staff knew how to support them and they had no complaints about the care they received.