Fairplay - Home Based Support Service

Updated 7 March 2019

The inspection:

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team:

The inspection was carried out by one inspector.

Service and service type:

Fairplay – Home based support is a residential respite service for two people and a domiciliary care service and provides personal care to children and younger people.

The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

Notice of inspection:

We gave the service seven days’ notice of the inspection visit because it is small and the registered manager is often out of the office supporting staff or providing care. We needed to be sure that they would be in.

Inspection site visit activity started on 24 January 2019 and ended on 11 February 2019. We visited the office location on 24 January 2019 to see the registered manager and staff; and to review care records and policies and procedures.

What we did:

Before the inspection we asked the provider to send us their Provider Information Return (PIR). This is information we require providers to send us at least once annually to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We also reviewed information that we held about the service such as notifications. These are events that happen in the service that the provider is required to tell us about.

People who used the service had complex needs and were not able to share their views with us. However, we observed how staff provided support and we spoke with two relatives on our inspection and one relative by telephone following our inspection.

We spoke with the registered manager, two care staff and a community nurse who was based within the service. We reviewed the care records for four people who used the service.

We also looked at a range of other records relating to the running of the service such as policies and procedures, complaints, staff files and the staff training plan. We also spoke with the registered manager about the action they took to check on quality and safety.

Updated 7 March 2019

About the service:

Fairplay – Home based support provides overnight respite care for up to two people and provides a domiciliary care service for these people. It also provides care and support for children and younger adults up to the age of twenty-five. The service is operated from a day care centre managed by Fairplay. The provider also operates a day care facility and support for siblings from this centre; CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with 'personal care' when a domiciliary or residential service is being provided. At the time of our inspection 15 people were receiving personal care as part of their care package.

People’s experience of using this service:

People received safe care from staff who knew them well. Potential risks to people's health, well-being or safety had been assessed to help keep people safe. Staff helped people to move safely using suitable equipment and understood the safe moving and handling techniques that were needed. Each person who had a small team of staff who provided their care. There were suitable arrangements for the safe storage, management and disposal of medicines and people were supported to take their medicines by trained staff. There were systems in place to help promote infection control and lessons were learnt where things went wrong.

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 support this practice. Staff received training to support them to be able to care for people safely. People were supported to have their specialist diets and staff understood how to ensure they received the nutrition they needed. The overnight accommodation was part of a day care provision and people felt this met their needs.

People had regular staff who provided care and positive relationships had been developed. Where people received care in their home, the staff arrived on time and stayed for the duration of the call. People had not experienced any missed calls. Staff knew how to provide care in a way that met their needs, routines and preferences and this was reviewed with them and their family. Staff had received an induction, ongoing training and had regular opportunities to discuss their work, training and development needs with the registered manager.

People’s diverse needs had been assessed and staff had guidance of how to meet people’s needs and achieve positive outcomes. The registered manager had developed positive links with external professionals and strived to continually develop the service, based on best practice guidance.

Staff respected and promoted people’s dignity and made sure they supported them in the way they wished, whilst encouraging them to remain as independent as possible.

The service was managed in a way that responded to people’s changing needs. Regular meetings were held for people and their family to share their opinions about the service and facilities provided. People participated in activities that interested them. The provider understood how any concerns and complaints raised by people needed to be investigated and resolved.

People and relatives knew the registered manager by name and felt that they were approachable with any problems. Staff felt the management team was approachable and that they could talk to them at any time. There were a range of checks undertaken routinely to help ensure that the service was safe. Satisfaction surveys were distributed to people who used the service, their friends and relatives, staff members and health professionals to gather feedback about how the service performed.

Rating at last inspection:

At the last inspection the service was rated good; 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.

Why we inspected:

This is a scheduled inspection based on our last published inspection in May 2016.

Follow up:

We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received we may inspect sooner.