Background to this inspection
Updated
24 September 2016
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.
This inspection took place on 17 May 2015 and was announced.
The provider was given 48 hours’ notice because the location provides a domiciliary care service; we needed to be sure that someone would be in.
The inspection team consisted of two adult social care inspectors.
A PIR dated 6 April 2016 was received from the provider. This is a form in which we ask the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We also looked at the notifications and other intelligence the Care Quality Commission had received about the home.
We looked at four care plans, five staff recruitment files, we spoke to five people who used the service and five staff members. We also spoke with two healthcare professionals.
Updated
24 September 2016
This inspection took place on 17 May 2016 and was announced. Northwest Community Services is a domiciliary care agency which provides care for people with complex care needs in their own homes. At the time of our inspection there were 156 people receiving a service and 171 staff providing a service.
There was a registered manager in post at the time of our inspection. 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.
Staff were knowledgeable regarding safeguarding and knew how to raise concerns when necessary. Risk assessments had been completed to ensure the environment was safe and in areas, such as mental health and mobility. There was an incidents policy and emergency plans in place to ensure the safety of people.
Medication risk assessments had been undertaken and medication management plans were in place for staff to follow. Medication awareness training was provided for staff.
Safe recruitment practices were clearly recorded in staff files to ensure only suitable staff were employed to work with vulnerable people. There were appropriate numbers of staff available to meet people’s needs.
People were supported by staff who knew them well. Care was person centred. Care plans included information regarding people’s social history, preferences and choices, which enabled staff to provide support based on the person’s wishes.
Staff told us they were well supported, received monthly supervision and an annual appraisal. Consent was sought from people in areas such as finances, administration of medicines and care planning. When people were unable to consent, the principles of The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) were followed to ensure care was provided in people’s best interest.
People were supported to engage in activities that were purposeful and meaningful to them and were supported to access advice and support from relevant health professionals in order to maintain their health and wellbeing.
People told us staff were kind and caring towards them and had a good understanding of how to communicate with people who used methods other than spoken English. People were appropriately referred to other health professionals to maintain their health and wellbeing.
People’s nutritional needs were being met by staff who supported them to shop and prepare meals based on individual preferences. Staff were aware of people’s needs from detailed information in the care plans we viewed and what support they required regarding their nutrition.
Quality assurance systems were in place to monitor the quality of the service, such as surveys, audit’s, spot checks and regular team meetings. People told us they were able to raise any issues with the manager and knew how to make a complaint should they need to. The registered manager was well respected and people we spoke with provided positive feedback about the management of the service.