Background to this inspection
Updated
12 June 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 was a comprehensive inspection. The inspection took place on 18 May and was announced. The provider was given 48 hours’ notice because the location provides domiciliary care services. The registered manager is often out of the office supporting staff or providing care. We wanted to make sure the registered manager would be available to support our inspection, or someone who could act on their behalf. The registered manager was not present during the inspection because they were on holiday, but had arranged for a deputy manager to be available for us.
The inspection was carried out by one inspector.
Before the inspection we reviewed other information we held about the service, including previous inspection reports and notifications sent to us by the provider. Notifications are information about specific important events the service is legally required to send to us. We also looked at information in the 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.
During the inspection we spoke with two people using the service, two relatives , one of the deputy managers and four members of staff. We also received written feedback from one other person using the service and two relatives. We reviewed three people's care and support records and four staff files. We also looked at records relating to the management of the service such as incident and accident records, meeting minutes, recruitment and training records, policies, audits and complaints.
Updated
12 June 2018
White Horse Care Trust Domiciliary Service provides care and support to six people with learning disabilities living in the community.
This service provides care and support to people living in 3 'supported living' settings, so that they can live in their own homes as independently as possible. People's care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. CQC does not regulate premises used for supported living; this inspection looked at people’s personal care and support.
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 ongoing 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.
People said they felt safe. Staff knew how to keep people safe. Risk assessments were in place and we saw examples of positive risk taking. These enabled people to be as independent as possible whilst maintaining their safety. Incidents and accidents were reported and analysed. Safe recruitment processes were undertaken. Medicines were managed safely.
Staff had been trained to carry out their roles. They had regular supervision sessions with a line manager and all said they felt well supported. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. One relative said “Staff could have wrapped [person’s name] in cotton wool, but they didn’t; they’ve empowered him.”
People told us staff were “brilliant” and “very kind and very helpful.” Relatives said “The staff are great.” Staff spoke positively about their roles.
Support plans were person centred and clearly detailed people’s preferences and choices about how they wanted to be supported. People were involved in writing and reviewing their plans. One person said “I want to be more independent in the future. The staff know that and are helping me with it.” There was a complaints procedure in place; this was also available in an easy read format.
The values of the trust were embedded in the day to day running of the service. Staff said management support was “excellent”. There were robust quality assurance systems in place.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.