Midland Mencap

Updated 26 April 2019

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

Inspection team: One inspector and an expert by experience formed the inspection team. An expert by experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

Service and service type: Midland Mencap is a domiciliary care agency.

The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

Notice of inspection: We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection visit because it is a care agency. We needed to be sure someone would be available to speak with and show us records. Inspection site visit activity started on 5 March 2019 and ended on 7 March 2019. We visited the office location on both these dates to speak with the registered manager and office staff; and to review care records and policies and procedures. We carried out telephone calls to people and family members on 6 March 2019.

What we did: Before we visited the service we checked the information we held about this location and the service provider, for example, inspection history, statutory notifications and complaints. A notification is information about important events which the service is required to send to CQC by law. We contacted professionals involved in caring for people who used the service, including commissioners and safeguarding staff. We also contacted Healthwatch. Healthwatch is the local consumer champion for health and social care services. They give consumers a voice by collecting their views, concerns and compliments through their engagement work. Information provided by these professionals was used to inform the inspection.

We used 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 the inspection: During inspection we spoke with four people who used the service and four family members. We spoke with the registered manager, nominated individual, head of housing, care and support, and three care staff. We looked at the care records of three people who used the service and the personnel files for two members of staff.

Updated 26 April 2019

About the service: Midland Mencap is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to adults living in their own homes. Not everyone using Midland Mencap receives 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. At the time of the inspection, there were 109 people receiving the regulated activity.

The service also provided a carers emergency response service (CERS). This provided a back up service to carers to ensure the person they cared for was given support in the case of an emergency. For example, if the carer was admitted to hospital or had another urgent appointment.

People’s experience of using this service: People were at the heart of Midland Mencap, and were encouraged and supported to be active participants in the development of the service. The service was an important part of the local community and there was a strong emphasis on continuous improvement.

People told us they received a good service and felt safe. Accidents and incidents were recorded and investigated, and risk assessments were in place. The registered manager understood their responsibilities about safeguarding and staff had been appropriately trained. Arrangements were in place for the safe administration of medicines.

There were enough staff on duty to meet the needs of people. The provider had an effective recruitment and selection procedure in place, and carried out relevant vetting checks when they employed staff. Staff were suitably trained and received regular supervisions and appraisals.

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’s needs were assessed before they started using the service. Staff treated people with dignity and respect and helped to maintain people’s independence by encouraging them to care for themselves where possible.

The provider had a complaints procedure in place and people were aware of how to make a complaint.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk.

Rating at last inspection: At the last inspection the service was rated Good (April 2016).

Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection. It was scheduled based on the previous rating.

Follow up: We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received we may inspect sooner.