Background to this inspection
Updated
11 December 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 6 and 7 November 2018 and was announced. We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection visit because it is a small service and the manager is often out of the office supporting staff or providing care. We needed to be sure that they would be in. The inspection was carried out by two inspectors.
The provider had completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We checked the information we held about the service and the provider. This included notifications the provider had sent to us about significant events at the service. We used all this information to formulate our inspection plan.
We used a range of different methods to help us understand people's experiences. We visited two people in their home and made telephone calls to two relatives. We spoke with three members of care staff and one of the providers. Office staff were also available to support us during our inspection and attended our feedback.
Updated
11 December 2018
37a-38a Eastgate Street is a domiciliary care agency and supported living service. It provides personal care to people living in their own homes. It provides a service to people with a learning disability. At the time of our inspection 21 people were being supported.
The care service has been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen.”Registering the Right Support CQC policy.
At our last inspection we rated the service good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and on-going monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.
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 continued to receive safe care. Individual risks to people were considered and reviewed when needed. There were enough suitably recruited staff available to offer support to people and medicines were managed in a safe way. There were safeguarding procedures in place and these were followed when needed. Infection control procedures were in place and followed. There were systems in place to ensure lessons were learnt when things went wrong.
People continued to receive effective care. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff support them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. People were involved with preparing their meals and were supported to make choices. Staff received training and an induction that helped them to support people. When needed people received support from health professionals.
People continued to be supported in a caring way by staff they were happy with. People's privacy and dignity was promoted and people continued to be offered choices. People were encouraged to be independent and maintain relationships that were important to them.
People continued to receive responsive care. Staff knew people well and their preferences were considered. People had the opportunity to participate in activities they enjoyed. Complaint procedures were in place and followed when needed.
The service remained well led. Quality assurance systems were in place to identify where improvements could be made and when needed these changes were made. The provider notified us of significant events that occurred within the home. Feedback was sought from people and their relatives and this was used to bring about changes.