Archived: Durham Domiciliary Care

We considered all the evidence we gathered under the outcomes we inspected. We used the information to answer the five questions we always ask;

' Is the service caring?

' Is the service responsive?

' Is the service safe?

' Is the service effective?

' Is the service well led?

Below is a summary of what we found. If you want to see the evidence that supports our summary please read the full report.

Is the service caring?

Staff could tell us about people's individual needs and preferences and were respectful of their diverse needs. A relative told us, "My relative receives good care. The staff are brilliant and keep me updated"

Another relative told us 'Care is very good.'

We observed staff with service users who were caring and attentive to people's needs.

Is the service responsive?

Each person's care plan contained an assessment of needs. There were detailed records of their healthcare needs.

The service sought people's views on activities they liked to do and tried where possible to meet those needs.

Relatives told us they were kept informed of changes to their relative's care and were asked for their views.

Is the service safe?

One relative told us 'My relative is well looked after, I do not worry about them.'

Each person's care plan had risk assessments to minimise the risks of them going out, for example, or eating or being in the kitchen at home.

Is the service effective?

People all had individual care plans which set out their care needs. Relatives commented about staff stability and continuity which enabled them to know each person's needs. We found that people of varying needs and conditions were well cared for and that their care was being delivered in line with their needs.

Is the service well-led?

The service had a registered manager. Relatives told us they had confidence in the current management and that they were very approachable.

The provider had a system to assure the quality of service they provided. The way the service was run had been regularly reviewed. A range of checks were carried out including care records, finance and medication audits.

We found care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way which ensured people's safety and welfare. People we spoke with were positive about the care and support they received. Comments included 'They (the staff) help me with shopping and cooking. They take me swimming and horse riding. Today the staff are taking me to the hospital about my eye.'

We saw appropriate procedures were in place so staff were clear about the support each person needed with their medicines.

We found staff were recruited appropriately. This helped to make sure only people with the right skills and knowledge were employed to work for the agency.

We saw the provider had a system to regularly assess and monitor the quality of the service people received. We found there was also an effective complaints procedure.

Everyone told us the staff treated them with respect. One person said "I like the staff.' Another person said "They treat me very good. I'm very happy with the service.'

People were supported to make choices and to develop independent living skills. One person said 'They give me the right level of support with cooking and shopping.'

People told us staff always turned up and if they were running late they would always contact them to let them know.

During our visits we had the opportunity of watching staff practices as they supported people. We heard staff address people respectfully and explain to people the support they were providing. Staff were friendly and very polite and understood the support and communication needs of people in their care. Staff waited for people to make decisions about how they wanted their care to be provided.

People told us they felt able to say if they were unhappy. One person said 'I would tell staff if I was unhappy.' People said 'They listen to me. Everything is alright.'