You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 16 June 2018

This comprehensive inspection took place on 30 May and 4 June 2018 and was announced. This was the first inspection for Different Care who registered with the CQC in October 2017.

This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats in the community. It provides a service to older adults and specialises in dementia care.

The service had a registered manager who had been in post since October 2017.

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.

There were currently eight people provided with care and support from Different Care with one carer and the registered manager and director currently providing the care and support.

Care records and risk assessments were very informative, well-kept and up-to-date. Each person using the service had a personalised support plan and risk assessment. All records we saw were complete, up to date and regularly reviewed. We found that people and their relatives were involved in decisions about their care and support. There was an emergency continuity plan in all files looked at that would be used for example if the person was taken to hospital. The information was a summary of the care and support required and other relevant information. We also saw that medications were handled appropriately and safely.

We found that recruitment practices were in place which included the completion of pre-employment checks prior to a new member of staff working at the service. A comprehensive induction programme was in place with a programme to incorporate regular training and supervision to enable staff to work safely and effectively. The directors of the service were also business and performance coaching registered and provided training. There was also an up to date staff handbook that staff were given.

People's GPs and other healthcare professionals were contacted for advice about people’s health needs whenever necessary.

The provider had systems in place to ensure that people were protected from the risk of harm or abuse. We saw there were policies and procedures in place and training to guide staff in relation to safeguarding adults.

The service had quality assurance processes in place including service user quality of care and support questionnaires. The service’s policies and procedures had been reviewed by the provider in January 2018 and these included policies on health and safety, confidentiality, mental capacity, medication, whistle blowing, safeguarding and recruitment.

People told us they were extremely happy with the staff and felt that the staff understood their support needs. The two people we spoke with had no complaints about the service. The provider had a complaints procedure in place and this was available in the ‘Service User Guide’ and in place at the home of the two people.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 16 June 2018

The service was safe

Safeguarding policies and procedures were in place and staff had received training about safeguarding people.

Staff had been recruited safely. Appropriate recruitment, disciplinary and other employment policies were in place.

Staff had received training about medication handling and managed people�s medication safely when required.

Effective

Good

Updated 16 June 2018

The service was effective

Staff were appropriately inducted, received training and were provided with a programme for regular supervision and an annual appraisal.

People had given consent for care to be provided and the service had policies and procedures in place in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

The provider provided initial assessment visits where peoples� needs were looked at and included assessing and creating a personalised care and support plan.

Caring

Good

Updated 16 June 2018

The service was caring.

Confidentiality of people�s care files and personal information was respected.

People told us that their dignity and privacy were respected at all times when staff supported them and staff showed a regard for peoples� individuality.

People told us that there was good communication between them and the service and staff understood them.

Responsive

Good

Updated 16 June 2018

The service was responsive.

Suitable processes were in place to deal with complaints appropriately and people�s comments and complaints were taken seriously and investigated.

People who used the service told us they were involved in their plan of care and their support needs were assessed with them.

Care and support plans and risk assessments were reviewed regularly and there were good records of communication with medical professionals.

Well-led

Good

Updated 16 June 2018

The service was well-led.

Clear quality assurance systems were in place to ensure the service provided safe and good care and people who used the service had opportunities to express their views.

The provider and manager were very well organised and had clear roles and responsibilities for staff.

The service had a manager who was registered with the Care Quality Commission.