RockSolid 247 Limited

RockSolid 247 is a domiciliary care agency. The service provides personal care to children with physical disabilities, sensory impairment and learning disabilities or autistic spectrum disorder. At the time of our inspection there was 1 person receiving personal care.

Not everyone who used the service received personal care. In this service, the Care Quality Commission can only inspect the service received by people who get support with personal care. This includes help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where people receive such support, we also consider any wider social care provided.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

We expect health and social care providers to guarantee autistic people and people with a learning disability the choices, dignity, independence, and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. Right Support, right care, right culture is the statutory guidance which supports CQC to make assessments and judgements about services providing support to people with a learning disability and/or autistic people.

The service was able to demonstrate how they were meeting the underpinning principles of “Right Support, Right Care, Right Culture.

Right support:

Children were receiving care that supported them to make their own decisions and be involved in their care. Children were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. Children were supported to stay safe and were cared for by staff who went through a robust recruitment process. Children were supported as individuals. This included providing food in an appropriate way and communicating with people in a way they understood.

Right care:

Children received person-centred care. Staff had developed good relationships with people and demonstrated a respectful and kindly approach towards them. Staff followed people's care plans to help ensure that care was effective and safe and staff were provided with specific training to assist with this.

Right culture:

The service had a positive culture that was person centred. Staff told us they enjoyed their job and making a positive difference to someone's life. The registered manager displayed good leadership skills and staff and representatives spoke positively about their support. The provider had clear and effective governance systems in place that identified and managed risks through audits.

For more information, please read the detailed findings section of this report. If you are reading this as a separate summary, the full report can be found on the Care Quality Commission (CQC) website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection and update

The last rating for this service was inadequate (published 12 January 2022).

At our last inspection we found breaches of the regulations in relation to safe care and treatment, person centred care, staffing and good governance. The provider completed an action plan after the last inspection to tell us what they would do and by when to improve.

At this inspection we found improvements had been made and the provider was now meeting this regulation.

This service has been in Special Measures since 10 November 2021. During this inspection the provider demonstrated that improvements have been made. The service is no longer rated as inadequate overall or in any of the key questions. Therefore, this service is no longer in Special Measures.

Why we inspected

We carried out this inspection to follow up on action we told the provider to take at the last inspection.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.

RockSolid247 Limited is a domiciliary care service providing personal care to children in their own homes. At the time of the inspection two children received personal care.

Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also consider any wider social care provided.

People's experience of using this service and what we found

The assessment and management of risk was inadequate. Whilst staff told us they knew how to keep the children they cared for safe, assessments of children’s needs were not completed before they started using the service. Risks relating to the safety, health and welfare of children had not been assessed by the provider. Therefore, guidance and instructions to help staff manage risks was not in place at the time of the inspection. The director and staff relied solely on the information provided to them by the local authority to manage and mitigate risks. The director could not assure themselves the service provided was safe.

Risks associated with COVID-19 had not been assessed. National infection prevention and control guidance was not followed which placed both children and staff at risk. Staff had not completed infection prevention and control or basic first aid training to help them provide safe care. Staff had received training to help them protect children from the risk of abuse. The director understood their role in protecting children and knew how to escalate any concerns to ensure they were investigated.

Staff were recruited safely. Enough staff were employed to meet children’s needs and relatives told us they had confidence in the ability of staff. However, the organisations staff induction did not reflect nationally recognised induction standards.

Leadership at the service needed to be strengthened and improved. The registered manager had not been at work since May 2021 and the director had taken over the responsibility for running the service in their absence. The director was open and honest about the challenges the registered managers absence had caused and how their absence had impacted on the service.

Whilst the director spoke passionately about providing a caring service, the individual characteristics of children including their emotional needs had not been assessed. Furthermore, children and their families had not been involved in planning and making decisions about the care provided by RockSolid 247.

Relatives felt staff were kind and respectful. Whilst staff knew the children they cared for well care records were not in place to help them provide personalised and responsive care. Staff understood how children preferred to communicate. However, we found children's communication needs had not been assessed and consideration had not been given to make information available in a format that met children’s and their families communication needs. Whilst staff felt supported and spoke positively about the director more needed to be done to improve communication and engage with children and their families to promote an inclusive and empowering culture.

The director was responsible for running the service but lacked understanding of regulatory requirements. They had failed to operate systems or processes to assess, monitor and improve the quality and safety of the service provided. Audits and checks did not take place and the system used to gather feedback about the service from children and their families was ineffective.

The lack of robust governance had resulted in the failure to identify the issues that we found. A relative told us they did not know how to make a complaint about the service because the providers complaints policy had not been shared with them. That meant opportunities to learn lessons and drive forward improvement could have been missed.

The director welcomed our inspection and they were responsive to our feedback. During and following our visit they took a variety of immediate actions to address the shortfalls we had identified. We acknowledged the director’s commitment to making improvements to benefit children.

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

Rating at last inspection

This service was registered with us on 20/08/2019 and this is the first inspection.

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection of this newly registered service.

Enforcement

We are mindful of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on our regulatory function. This meant we took account of the exceptional circumstances arising as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic when considering

what enforcement action was necessary and proportionate to keep people safe as a result of this inspection. We will continue to discharge our regulatory enforcement functions required to keep people safe and to

hold providers to account where it is necessary for us to do so.

We have identified breaches in relation to safe care and treatment, person centred care, staffing and good governance.

Full information about CQC's regulatory response to the more serious concerns found during inspections is

added to reports after any representations and appeals have been concluded.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our reinspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.

The overall rating for this service is 'Inadequate' and the service is therefore in 'special measures'. This

means we will keep the service under review and, if we do not propose to cancel the provider's registration,

we will re-inspect within 6 months to check for significant improvements.

If the provider has not made enough improvement within this timeframe. And there is still a rating of

inadequate for any key question or overall rating, we will take action in line with our enforcement

procedures. This will mean we will begin the process of preventing the provider from operating this service.

This will usually lead to cancellation of their registration or to varying the conditions of the registration.

For social care services, the maximum time for being in special measures will usually be no more than

12 months. If the service has demonstrated improvements when we inspect it. And it is no longer rated as

inadequate for any of the five key questions it will no longer be in special measures.