You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 22 September 2018

This inspection took place on 9, 15 and 20 August 2018 and was announced.

At the time of our inspection the service was providing small packages of care to 60 people.

This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats in the community as well as specialist housing. It provides a service to older adults and younger disabled adults. The Care Quality Commission (CQC) only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’; help with tasks relating to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also take into account any wider social care provided.

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.

Staff were recruited safely and checks were made on their character and suitability to work with vulnerable adults. Staff were only allowed to work once these checks came back as satisfactory.

Risks assessments were in place and were reviewed regularly. Risk assessments were suitably detailed and contained information with regards to the management and reduction of risk.

Medication was stored in people's own home and administered safely. Where staff were responsible for administering people's medication this was done by trained staff who had their competency assessed by the registered manager.

Staff were provided with Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) such as gloves and aprons in accordance with the service's infection control procedure.

Staff were aware of safeguarding procedures and were able to describe the action they would take to ensure people were kept safe from harm. This included raising alerts to the registered manager, local authority safeguarding teams, the police, or whistleblowing.

Rotas showed that staff were assigned their care calls using an electric monitoring system (ECM). Staff were issued with smart phones and were required to 'log' in and out of calls to ensure people were getting their allocated time.

The registered manager and the staff understood the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and associated legislation.

People were supported by staff with eating and drinking and staff were aware of people’s dietary preferences.

Staff supported people to contact other healthcare professionals such as GP’s and District Nurses if they felt unwell.

Staff undertook training in accordance with the registered providers training policy. Staff told us they enjoyed the training. Training was a mixture of e-learning and practical training sessions. Some training had expired; however staff were booked on to attend these courses. Staff spoken with confirmed they had regular supervision and an annual appraisal. Some supervisions were due to take place, these had been scheduled in by the end of August.

People we spoke with were complimentary about the caring nature of the staff and we received positive comments about the registered manager. We did not observe care being delivered, however, people told us staff were kind and caring in their approach.

People told us that they were always kept informed and involved in their care.

Care plans contained basic information about people, what their preferences were and how they liked their care to be conducted. Information in care plans was regularly reviewed and updated in line with people’s changing needs. This meant that the registered provider was responsive to people’s needs and preferences.

Complaints were investigated in line with the complaints procedure and responded to appropriately.

Audits took place which checked service provision and action plans were implemented to improve practice. A new auditing tool had recently been in

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 22 September 2018

The service was safe.

People received their medications on time.

Staff recruitment was robust and checks were undertaken on staff before they started working for the service.

Risks to people were assessed, and there was information on how to manage and reduce these risks.

People told us they felt safe receiving care from New Day Care.

Effective

Good

Updated 22 September 2018

The service was effective.

The staff had the correct training to support people effectively. Some dates were past due, however staff were booked to attend.

Staff received regular supervision and annual appraisals.

People were supported to eat and drink appropriately.

The service was working in accordance with the principles of the Mental Capacity Act and associated legislation.

Caring

Good

Updated 22 September 2018

The service was caring.

People told us staff were kind, caring and treated them with dignity and respect.

People's preferences were reflected throughout care plans. This helped staff to get to know people and provide care based on their needs and preferences.

Care plans promoted people's choice and independence.

Responsive

Good

Updated 22 September 2018

The service was responsive.

There was a process in place for recording, acknowledging and responding to complaints. People we spoke with told us they knew how to complain.

People received care which was planned and personalised in accordance to their preferences. Staff demonstrated that they knew people well.

Staff were trained to support people who were on an end of life pathway to remain comfortable in their home with additional support from other medical professionals.

Well-led

Good

Updated 22 September 2018

The service was well-led.

There were polices and procedure in place for staff to follow, however, we raised that some of these would benefit from further review.

The registered manager was aware of their role and had reported all incidents to the CQC as required.

People and staff told us they liked the registered manager and knew them by name.

There was regular auditing taking place of care files, medication and other documentation relating to the running of the service.