You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 8 August 2018

This announced comprehensive inspection was carried out between 28 June 2018 and 6 July 2018.

DT Careplus is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats. Not everyone using DT Careplus receives regulated activity. 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.

The service provides care and support to children and young people with learning disabilities and autistic spectrum conditions. After the inspection, the provider applied to us so that they also provided support to adults and older people, including those living with dementia. They have now registered to do so. At the time of the inspection, two people were being supported by the service.

The care service has been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen.

There was 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.

People were safe because there were effective risk assessments in place, and systems to keep them safe from potential abuse and harm. There were safe staff recruitment processes in place and there were sufficient numbers of staff to support people safely. Staff took appropriate precautions to ensure people were protected from the risk of acquired infections. People’s medicines were managed safely. Incidents were reviewed and there was evidence of learning from these.

People’s needs had been assessed and they had care plans that took account of their individual needs, preferences, and choices. Staff had regular supervision and they had been trained to meet people’s individual needs effectively. The requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 were being met, and staff understood their roles and responsibilities to seek people’s consent prior to care and support being provided. Where required, people had been supported to have enough to eat and drink to maintain their health and wellbeing. They were also supported to access healthcare services in emergency situations.

People were supported by caring, friendly and respectful staff. They were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives, and the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

Staff regularly reviewed the care provided to people with their relatives’ input to ensure that this continued to meet their individual needs, in a person-centred way. The provider had an effective system to handle complaints and concerns. People were supported to pursue their hobbies and interests.

The provider’s quality monitoring processes had been used effectively to drive improvements. Relatives of people using the service and staff we spoke with were happy with the quality of the service. They were enabled to provide feedback and contribute to the development of the service.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 8 August 2018

The service was safe.

There were systems in place to safeguard people from the risk of harm. This included effective safeguarding policies and procedures, and individual risk assessments.

There were safe recruitment procedures and there was enough staff to support people safely.

People’s medicines were being managed safely.

The manager reviewed incidents and accidents, and actions taken to prevent them from happening again.

Effective

Good

Updated 8 August 2018

The service was effective.

People's care needs were assessed, and staff provided effective care and support that met people's individual needs.

Staff received regular training, supervision and support in order for them to support people effectively.

People were supported to have enough to eat and drink.

The requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 were being met, but these were not always relevant to some people the service supported, who were under 16 years old.

Caring

Good

Updated 8 August 2018

The service was caring.

People were supported by staff that were kind, caring and friendly.

Staff respected people’s choices and supported them to maintain their independence.

People were supported in a respectful manner that promoted their privacy and dignity.

Responsive

Good

Updated 8 August 2018

The service was responsive.

People had personalised care plans to enable staff to provide person-centred care.

People’s needs were met by responsive and attentive staff.

The provider had a system to manage people’s complaints and concerns.

Well-led

Good

Updated 8 August 2018

The service was well-led.

There was stable leadership at the service which resulted in a consistently safe, effective and compassionate service that provided good quality care to people.

People, relatives and staff were enabled to share their experiences of the service.

The provider had effective systems in place to assess and monitor the quality of the service.

The service worked closely with other stakeholders to ensure that they continued to provide the care people required.