Archived: Enable Support

Updated 7 September 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.

This comprehensive inspection took place on the 8 August 2018 and was announced. The provider was given 24 hours' notice because the location provides a domiciliary care service and we needed to be sure that the registered provider would be available.

The inspection was conducted by one inspector. On this occasion we did not ask the provider to send us a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. However, we offered the provider the opportunity to share information they felt relevant with us.

We visited the person who used the service to gain their views about the service they received and visited the registered provider’s office and spoke with them about their service. We looked at the support records for the person who used the service, as well as a range of other records relating to the running of the service such as audits and policies and procedures.

Updated 7 September 2018

Enable Support is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats in the community. It provides a service to older adults and younger adults with a disability. At the time of our inspection one person was receiving personal care as part of their care package.

This is the provider’s first inspection since registration.

A registered manager was not required because the registered provider managed the service. Registered providers have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

The person who used the service was protected from abuse and avoidable harm because the registered provider understood their role and responsibility of what action to take to safeguard the person. Risks associated with the person’s care and living environment had been assessed and planned for. The registered provider at the time of our inspection did not employee any staff. They provided care themselves and as part of their registration requirements with CQC, checks had been completed on their suitability to provide care. The person was prompted to take their medicines safely. The registered provider knew how to minimise the risk of cross contamination and followed infection control best practice guidance. When incidents had occurred, these had been recorded and action was taken to reduce further risks.

The registered provider had completed appropriate training to enable them to fulfil their role and sought external support and advise when required. The person who used the service retained responsibility for their health care and the registered provider supported them, where needed, to access healthcare services. The person was supported with meals and drinks where required and choices were respected and acted upon.

The person who used the service had maximum choice and control of their life and the registered provider supported them in the least restrictive way possible. The person was fully involved in making choices and decisions about how they wanted to receive their care and support. The registered provider understood the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and how to respond if the person no longer had capacity to make specific decisions.

A positive relationship had been developed between the person who used the service and the registered provider who was caring and respectful. The person’s privacy and dignity were maintained and they felt comfortable with the registered provider. The registered provider had not made available information about independent advocacy service but agreed to do this.

The person felt confident that any concerns they raised with the registered provider would be listened to and acted upon.

The registered provider monitored the service they provided. Whilst they had policies and procedures in place that were based on best practice guidance and legislation, some policies were missing and it was not clear on the frequency policies were reviewed to ensure they were up to date.