Background to this inspection
Updated
16 August 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.
The inspection took place on 5 July 2018 and was announced. The provider was given 48 hours notice because the location provides a domiciliary care service to people in their own homes and we needed to be sure that someone would be at the office and able to assist us to arrange home visits.
The inspection was carried out by one inspector. We visited the office location and also visited someone receiving a service. We then made follow up telephone calls to people and staff.
Before the inspection we reviewed all the information we held about the service. This included notifications the service had sent us. A notification is the means by which providers tell us important information that affects the running of the service and the care people receive. We contacted the local authority to obtain their views about the service.
We had not requested a 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. We gathered this information during the inspection.
During the inspection we visited one person who used the service and spoke with two people on the telephone. We also spoke with three members of staff and the registered manager.
We looked at a range of records during the inspection, these included five care records. We also looked at information relating to the management of the service including quality assurance audits, health and safety records, policies, risk assessments, meeting minutes and staff training records. We looked at three staff files, the recruitment process, complaints, training and supervision records.
Following our inspection visit, we requested further documentation from the service. This included contact details of people who had given consent for us to contact them and policies relating to different areas of service delivery. This information was provided.
Updated
16 August 2018
The inspection took place on 5 July 2018 and was announced.
The service registered in October 2017 and this was the first inspection. The registered manager spent time speaking with us about their progress since they started to provide support to people in January 2018 and their learning and development during this time.
The service is registered to provide personal care to people living in their own homes. At the time of our inspection the service was providing personal care to eight people.
This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own apartments in the community. It provides a service to older adults and people with dementia. Not everyone using Skills Direct Bournemouth receives a 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.
Skills Direct Bournemouth’s office is situated at Bournemouth Airport. It provides support to people living in the Christchurch and Ferndown areas.
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 protected from the risk of harm by staff who understood the possible signs of abuse and how to recognise these and report any concerns. Staff were also aware of the risks that people faced and understood their role in managing these to ensure people received safe care. Risk assessments needed to include further details about how identified risks affected each individual.
People were supported by enough staff to provide effective, person centred support. Staff had been recruited safely with appropriate pre-employment checks and received training and support to ensure that they had the necessary skills and knowledge to meet people’s needs.
People received their medicines as prescribed and staff worked with healthcare professionals to ensure that people received joined up, consistent care.
People were supported from the spread of infection by staff who understood their role in infection control and used appropriate Personal Protective Equipment (PPE).
People were supported to make choices about all areas of their support and staff understood the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005.
People were supported to have enough to eat and drink.
People and those important to them were involved in planning the support they would receive and were asked for their views about the support and any changes to people’s needs. Reviews identified where people’s needs had changed and reflected changes to the support provided in response to this.
People were supported by staff that respected their individuality and protected their privacy. Staff understood how to advocate and support people to ensure that their views were heard and told us that they would ensure that people’s religious or other beliefs were supported and protected. Staff had undertaken training in equality and diversity and understood how to use this learning in practice.
People told us that staff were kind and compassionate and people had formed strong relationships with staff teams who were well matched with people and provided consistent care.
Staff were confident in their roles and felt supported by the registered manager. Feedback indicated that the office was easy to contact during or outside office hours.
Quality assurance measures were in place and used to identify any areas for improvements. Action plans were in place to record these.