You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 19 March 2019

JAAN Services Ltd 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 or adults and children with disabilities.

Not everyone using JAAN Services received the regulated activity; the Care Quality Commission (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. At the time of our inspection, ten people were receiving personal care.

This inspection took place on 4 February 2019 and finished on 8 February 2019. This was the first comprehensive inspection for the service since it registered with the CQC in October 2017.

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 received safeguarding training, they knew how to recognise the signs and symptoms of abuse and how to report any concerns of abuse. Risk management plans were in place to protect and promote people’s safety. The staffing arrangements were suitable to keep people safe. Recruitment practices ensured staff were suitable to work with people. Infection control procedures were followed to reduce the risks of spreading infection or illness.

The provider understood their responsibility to comply with the Accessible Information Standard (AIS), which came into force in August 2016. The AIS is a framework that makes it a legal requirement for all providers to ensure people with a disability or sensory loss can access and understand information they are given.

Staff received induction training when they first started to work at the service. On-going refresher training ensured staff could provide care and support for people following current best practice guidance. Staff supervision systems ensured that regular one to one supervision and appraisal took place to monitor performance.

Staff supported people to eat and drink sufficient amounts to maintain a varied and balanced diet. Records about people’s health requirements were documented. Staff were able to support people to access health appointments if required.

People were encouraged to be involved in decisions about their care and support. Staff demonstrated their understanding of the Mental Capacity Act, 2005 (MCA) and they gained people's consent before providing personal care. People had their privacy, dignity and confidentiality maintained at all times. The provider had a complaints procedure in place to manage and respond to complaints.

People had their diverse needs assessed, they had positive relationships with staff and received care in line with best practice, meeting people’s personal preferences. Staff consistently provided people with respectful and compassionate care.

The service had a positive ethos and an open culture. The registered manager and the provider were visible role models in the service. People told us that they had confidence in the provider’s ability to provide a consistent service.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 19 March 2019

The service was safe.

Staff were knowledgeable about protecting people from harm and abuse.

Staff had been safely recruited and there were enough trained staff to support people with their needs.

Staff were trained in infection control, and people were protected from the spread of infection.

Effective

Good

Updated 19 March 2019

The service was effective.

Staff received training to keep their skills up to date and were supported in their role with regular supervision.

People received support with food and drink and their consent was gained before carrying out any personal care.

People had access to health care professionals to ensure they received effective care or treatment.

Caring

Good

Updated 19 March 2019

The service was caring.

People were supported to make decisions about their daily care and support they received.

Staff treated people with kindness and compassion.

People were treated with dignity and respect, and had the privacy they required.

Responsive

Good

Updated 19 March 2019

The service was responsive.

Care and support plans were personalised and reflected people's individual requirements.

People were involved in decisions regarding their care and support needs.

There was a complaints system in place and people were aware of this.

Well-led

Good

Updated 19 March 2019

The service was well led.

Systems in place to assess the quality of the service were effective.

People knew the provider, and could see them when required.

People were asked for, and gave feedback which was acted on.

The provider worked with other agencies to ensure effective care and support for people.