You are here

Dementia Care & Support at Home Limited Good

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 25 July 2018

This announced inspection took place on 21 and 22 June 2018. The inspection was announced because the service provides a domiciliary care service and we needed to make sure the registered manager would be available to facilitate the inspection.

Dementia Care & Support at Home is a domiciliary care service based in the Swinton area of Salford, Greater Manchester. People using the service receive care and support from staff at home, with packages of care funded by both the local authority and self-funders.

This was the first inspection we had carried out at Dementia Care & Support at Home. This was because the service re-registered with CQC in May 2017 and meant any previous inspections were associated with the old location.

At the time of the inspection there were approximately 42 people using the service, however only 38 were in receipt of a regulated activity which was personal care. Other people using the service were supported with domestic duties such as cooking and cleaning. As such we only focussed on people in receipt of a regulated activity during the inspection.

During this inspection, we found the service to be meeting the requirements of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014, however have made four recommendations regarding accident and incident monitoring, care plans, medication and staff team meetings.

There was a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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.

People told us they felt safe as result of the care and support they received and staff understood their responsibility with regards to safeguarding and how to report concerns.

Staff were recruited safely, with appropriate checks undertaken before staff commenced employment.

Staff told us they felt there were sufficient numbers of staff available to support people and said their weekly rotas were well managed. Some people said staff did not always turn up on time, but said they were contacted by staff from the office to let them know what was going on. People said missed visits were rare, but were again kept informed by staff.

People had individual risk assessments in their care plans and the service maintained and log of any accidents and incidents which had occurred, which detailed any follow up actions taken. Trends analysis of accidents was not routinely undertaken and we have made a recommendation about this in the detailed findings of the report.

People told us they received their medication on time and said staff watched them taking it and gave them a glass of water. We did identify missing signatures on four people’s medication administration records (MAR) we looked at. Medication audits of these MAR had stated there we no gaps in recording. We did note however that staff had recorded in the daily communication log, that people had been given their medication as prescribed. We have made a recommendation about this in the detailed findings of the report.

Staff told us they received enough training, induction, supervision and appraisal to support them in their role.

People told us they received enough to eat and drink. Staff had a good understanding about how to support people, such as ensuring people received plenty of extra fluids during the hot weather.

The people we spoke with told us they were happy with the care and support they received and described staff as kind and caring.

At the time of the inspection the registered manager was in the process of re-writing all care plans within the service. Therefore, staff were using the support plan provided by the local authority, where an overview of each person’s care needs was recorded. We have made a recommendation about this in

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 25 July 2018

The service was safe; however we have made a recommendation regarding accident and incident monitoring.

There were enough staff available to meet people’s care needs.

Appropriate systems were in place to safeguard people from abuse.

People received their medication as prescribed, however we have made a recommendation regarding medication auditing processes.

Effective

Good

Updated 25 July 2018

The service was effective.

Staff received the appropriate induction, training, supervision and appraisal to support them in their role.

People told us they received enough to eat and drink.

People said staff sought their consent before care was delivered.

Caring

Good

Updated 25 July 2018

The service was caring.

People who used the service and their relatives made positive comments about the care they received.

People said they felt treated with dignity and respect.

People spoke fondly of the staff who cared for them.

Responsive

Good

Updated 25 July 2018

The service was responsive; however we have made a recommendation regarding care plans.

Complaints were handled appropriately.

People had access to activities within the community.

There were systems in place to seek feedback from people who used the service and relatives.

Well-led

Good

Updated 25 July 2018

The service was well-led; however we have made a recommendation regarding staff team meetings.

We received positive feedback about management and leadership.

Staff told us they enjoyed working for the service.

Appropriate policies and procedures were in place.