• Services in your home
  • Homecare service

Archived: The Durnford Society Domiciliary Care Service

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Suite F3, Forresters House, Forresters Business Park, 43 Estover Road, Plymouth, Devon, PL6 7PL (01752) 696603

Provided and run by:
Durnford Society Limited (The)

Important: This service was previously registered at a different address - see old profile
Important: This service is now registered at a different address - see new profile

Latest inspection summary

On this page

Background to this inspection

Updated 18 May 2018

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This was a comprehensive inspection completed on the 16 and 17 April 2018 and was announced. We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection visit because the location provides a domiciliary care service and we needed to be sure that they would be in. The inspection was completed by one adult social care inspector.

Before our inspection we reviewed the information we held about the service. We reviewed notifications of incidents that the provider had sent us since their registration. A notification is information about important events, which the service is required to send us by law.

We reviewed the information the provider sent us in the Provider Information Return. This is information we require providers to send us at least once annually to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

During our inspection we met with seven people who received support with personal care and lived in their own home. We spoke with one relative, one professional, six staff members and the registered manager.

We looked at four records which related to people’s individual care needs. We viewed four staff recruitment files, training evidence and records associated with the management of the service. This included policies and procedures, people and staff feedback, and the complaints process.

Overall inspection


Updated 18 May 2018

The Durnford Society is a domiciliary care service registered to provide personal care. The service provides personal care and support to adults of all ages living in their own homes within the Plymouth area. It provides a service to people with a learning disability, who may also have a physical disability and people living with sensory impairment.

The Durnford Society Domiciliary Care Service provides care and support to people living in a 'supported living' setting, so that they can live as independently as possible. People's care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. CQC does not regulate premises used for supported living; this inspection looked at people's personal care and support.

The service supports some people on a 24 hour basis and others who may require support with personal care needs at specific times of the day and/or night. At the time of this inspection, 38 people received support with their personal care needs from the agency.

The service had 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.

At the last inspection in January 2016 the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

Why the service is rated Good.

We visited and spoke to seven people in their own homes and observed the interaction between them and the staff supporting them. People were not all able to fully verbalise their views, so staff used other methods of communication, for example visual choices and sign language.

People remained safe using the service. People were protected by safe recruitment procedures to help ensure staff were suitable to work with vulnerable people. People had their needs met by suitable numbers of staff, with additional staff support arranged when needed. One relative said how safe and well looked after their relative was.

Peoples’ medicines were managed safely. Staff received medicines training and understood the importance of safe administration and management of medicines.

People were protected from abuse because staff knew what action to take if they suspected someone was being abused, mistreated or neglected.

Peoples’ risks were assessed, monitored and managed by staff to help ensure they remained safe. Risk assessments were completed to help support and enable people to retain as much independence as possible and help reduce risks from occurring. Risks associated with people's care and living environment were effectively managed to ensure their freedom was promoted. People were supported by consistent staff to help meet their needs. People's independence was encouraged and staff helped people feel valued by supporting people to engage in everyday tasks, for example cleaning and shopping.

People received effective care from staff who had the skills and knowledge to meet their needs. Staff confirmed they attended team meetings and they received one to one supervision to monitor their practice with appraisals of performance. Staff without formal care qualifications completed the Care Certificate (a nationally recognised training course for staff new to care). Staff said the Care Certificate training looked at and discussed the Equality and Diversity policy of the company.

People were given the choice of meals, snacks and drinks they enjoyed while maintaining a healthy diet. Staff monitored people's health and well-being and made sure they had access to other healthcare professionals according to their individual needs.

People were enabled and supported to lead fulfilling, independent and active lives. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. People were supported to reach their goals and ambitions.

People’s equality and diversity was respected and people were supported in the way they wanted to be. People's human rights were protected because the registered manager and staff had an understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA).

People continued to receive a service that was caring. Staff demonstrated kindness and compassion for people through their conversations and interactions. If people found it difficult to communicate or express themselves, staff offered additional support and showed patience and understanding.

The service was responsive to people's needs and people were able to make choices about their day to day routines. People had access to a range of organised and informal activities which provided them with mental and social stimulation. People were supported to access the local community including part time employment.

People could make a complaint and were confident action would be taken to address their concerns. The registered manager and provider treated complaints as an opportunity to learn and improve. The complaints procedure was available in an easy read version to assist people.

People’s communication needs were known by staff. Staff adapted their communication methods dependent upon people’s needs, for example using simple questions and easy to understand information for people with cognitive difficulties. The service remained responsive to people's individual needs and provided personalised care and support. The registered manager had taken account of the Accessible Information Standard (AIS). The AIS is a requirement to help ensure people with a disability or sensory loss are given information they can understand, and the communication support they need. People received information in a format suitable for their individual needs. Throughout the inspection we saw evidence of how the registered manager and staff understood and promoted people's rights as equals regardless of their disabilities, backgrounds or beliefs.

The service was well led. The provider had systems in place to monitor, assess and improve the service. There was an open culture, and people, relatives and staff said they found access to the office and management team welcoming and easy. Staff were positive and happy in their jobs. There was a clear organisational structure in place.