Background to this inspection
Updated
9 June 2017
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 04 May 2017 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 was undertaken by one inspector.
In planning our inspection, we looked at the information we held about the service. This included notifications received from the provider about deaths, accidents/incidents and safeguarding alerts. A notification is information about important events which the provider is required to send us by law. We reviewed regular quality reports sent to us by the local authority that purchases the care on behalf of people, to see what information they held about the service. These are reports that tell us if the local authority has concerns about the service they purchase on behalf of people. We sent questionnaires to health and social care professionals and staff employed at the service. We received responses from seven staff and five care professionals.
Some people that used the service were not able to speak with us. During our inspection we spoke with two relatives, four care staff and both registered managers. We looked at safeguarding and complaints procedures, sampled two people’s care records; this included their medication administration records, needs assessments, care plans and daily reports. We also looked at the recruitment records of three care staff, questionnaires sent to people that used the service and quality assurance processes that the provider had in place to monitor the quality of the service. We sampled the rota for one person, to ensure that the correct numbers of staff were allocated to meet the person’s needs.
Updated
9 June 2017
This inspection took place on 04 May 2017 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.
140 Fort Dunlop provides personal care and support for people living in their own homes. At the time of our inspection there were two people using the service.
There were two 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.
This was the first inspection of this location since it was registered in December 2015.
People received a good quality service in which they had confidence. There were processes in place to monitor the quality of the service. People were asked to comment on the quality of service and people felt their views were listened to and acted upon.
People received a safe service because the provider had procedures in place to ensure that staff were trained and followed the procedures to ensure the risk of harm to people was reduced. The risk of harm to people receiving a service was assessed and managed appropriately; this ensured that people received care and support in a safe way. Where people received support from staff with taking prescribed medicines, this was done in a way that ensured the risk to people was minimised.
People received care and support from staff that were trained to be effective in their role. People’s rights were protected and they had choices in their daily lives. People were supported to maintain their diet and health needs where required. Staff were caring and people’s privacy, dignity independence and individuality was respected and promoted by staff.
People received care from staff that were suitably recruited, supported and in sufficient numbers to ensure people’s needs were met. This was because the provider had undertaken the relevant checks to ensure the staff they employed were suitable to work with people.
Whilst not everyone we spoke with felt that the provider was open and listened to their concerns. The evidence we found showed that other people, all staff and health care professionals were confident that the provider was open and receptive to comments and concerns and would take action to rectify any issue raised with them.