You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 5 February 2019

Teonfa Care Services is a domiciliary care service. They provide care and support to people living in their own homes so that they can live as independently as possible. Not everyone using this type of service 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, 43 people were being supported by the service.

This announced comprehensive inspection took place between 12 December 2018 and 11 January 2019.

The service had an overall rating of 'requires improvement' when we inspected it in October 2017. The provider needed to improve the key questions Safe and Well-led to at least good. At this inspection, we found they had improved the areas we had previously been concerned about. The overall rating has improved to 'good'.

However, Well-led was again rated ‘requires improvement’ because further improvements were required to the timeliness of care visits and people’s overall experience of the service. The provider needed to ensure that their systems were effective to enable them to achieve this quickly and in a sustainable way.

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 safe because there were effective risk assessments in place, and systems to keep them safe from harm. There were safe staff recruitment processes and there were enough staff to support people safely. Staff took appropriate precautions to ensure people were protected from the risk of acquired infections. People’s medicines were managed safely, and there was evidence of learning from incidents.

People’s needs had been assessed and they had care plans that took account of their individual needs, preferences, and choices. Staff had regular supervision and they had been trained to meet people’s individual needs effectively. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities to seek people’s consent prior to care and support being provided. Where required, people had been supported to have enough to eat and drink to maintain their health and wellbeing. They were also supported to access healthcare services when urgent care was needed.

People were supported by caring, friendly and respectful staff. They were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives, and the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

Staff supported people in a person-centred way. The provider had a system to handle complaints and concerns. Further work was necessary to ensure staff knew how people wanted to be supported at the end of their lives.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 5 February 2019

The service was now safe.

There were enough staff to support people safely. Rotas were now planned in a way that promoted consistent care.

There were systems to protect people from harm.

People�s medicines were being managed safely.

Incidents and accidents were reviewed to put systems to prevent recurrence.

Effective

Good

Updated 5 February 2019

The service remains Good.

Caring

Good

Updated 5 February 2019

The service remains Good.

Responsive

Good

Updated 5 February 2019

The service remains Good.

Well-led

Requires improvement

Updated 5 February 2019

The service was not always well-led.

Further work was necessary to improve the consistency of care visit times and people's experiences of the service.

The provider had systems to assess and monitor the quality of the service.

People and staff were enabled to share their experiences of the service.

The service worked closely with other stakeholders to ensure that they provided the care people required and expected.