We carried out a review of the data available to us about Southern Family Care Ltd on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Southern Family Care Ltd, you can give feedback on this service.
Southern Family Care Ltd is a domiciliary agency registered to provide personal care to both older and younger people in their own homes, however at the time of the inspection only three young people under the age of eighteen received the regulated activity of personal care.
Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also consider any wider social care provided.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People were unable to express their views about the care and support they received. Relatives and professionals were very positive about the care provided. We were told that staff were kind, friendly and attentive to people’s needs. Relatives told us there were enough staff to meet people’s needs. Staff felt that there were enough of them to meet people’s needs in a person-centred way. Staff were trained and felt well supported.
Relatives said that people felt safe and staff were aware of how to promote people’s safety. Regular checks were in place to ensure staff worked in accordance with training and health and safety guidance adhered to. Relatives and professionals told us that staff always put people’s safety and welfare first.
There were governance systems in place and these were being used effectively and regularly.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
People and their relatives were involved in planning their care. There were no complaints but there was a system in place to ensure they were responded to appropriately should one be raised. Feedback was sought through meetings and relatives told us the registered manager was always available to talk if needed.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection
The last rating for this service was Good (published 29 July 2017).
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.
At the last inspection on 14 and 20 January 2016 we rated the service Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.
We were unable to observe care provision or speak directly with people who received support due to their age, the complex conditions some of them lived with and the circumstances in which they were supported. However, we obtained feedback about the services provided from parents, health and social care professionals and staff.
There was a manager in post who had registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC). A registered manager is a person who has registered with the CQC 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
Parents told us that their children were safe and well cared for when supported by the service. Staff had received training in how to safeguard both adults and children from abuse and knew how to report concerns.
There were sufficient staff employed to meet people`s needs at all times. Staff had undergone employment checks prior to working in the service. Staff received training and felt supported to carry out their roles effectively.
Staff were trained to help and support people take medicines safely, however at the time of the inspection this was mainly managed by their relatives.
Potential risks to people’s health and well-being had been identified, reviewed and managed effectively to keep them safe.
People’s relatives and healthcare professionals were very positive about the skills, experience and abilities of staff who provided care and support.
Staff developed positive and caring relationships with the people they supported and their families and supported people in a personalised way.
Staff made every effort to ascertain people’s wishes and obtain their consent before providing personal care and support.
Parents and social care professionals, together with the people concerned wherever possible, were involved in the planning, delivery and reviews of the care and support provided.
The confidentiality of information held about people’s medical and personal histories was securely maintained.
Parents and relatives told us that support was provided in a way that promoted their family member’s dignity and respected their privacy.
People received care and support that met their needs and took account of their preferences. Staff were very knowledgeable about their preferences and routines which they used to good effect in delivering person centred care.
People were supported to pursue interests and take part in activities of their choosing, both at home and in the community.
Parents and relatives felt that staff listened to them and responded to any concerns they had in a positive way. They knew how to complain should the need arise but told us they had never had cause to do so.
Families, staff and professional stakeholders were very complimentary about the registered manager and how the service was operated.
Effective arrangements were in place to monitor risks and the quality of services provided.
The inspection took place on 14 and 20 January 2016 and was announced shortly before it took place due to the nature and size of the service. Although registered to provide personal care to both older and younger people in their own homes, at the time of our inspection four young people under the age of eighteen were supported but nobody over the age of eighteen received support. However, older people have received support in the past and may again in the future. The service was supporting a small number of families by providing personal care to children which, for example, helps them to attend school and enables parents to work or take a break from their primary carer responsibilities.
We were unable to observe care provision or speak directly with people who received support due to their age, the complex conditions some of them lived with and the circumstances in which they were supported. However, we obtained feedback about the services provided from parents/carers, relatives, health and social care professionals and staff.
There was a manager in post who had registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC). A registered manager is a person who has registered with the CQC 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
Parents and relatives told us that their family members were safe and well cared for when supported by the service. Staff had received training in how to safeguard both adults and children from abuse and knew how to report concerns. Safe and effective recruitment practices were followed to ensure that staff were suitable for the role performed. There were always sufficient numbers of staff available to meet people’s agreed care and support needs in a timely and patient way.
Staff were trained to help and support people take medicines safely but at the time of our inspection there was no requirement for them to do so. Potential risks to people’s health and well-being had been identified, reviewed and managed effectively to keep them safe.
People’s relatives and healthcare professionals were very positive about the skills, experience and abilities of staff who provided care and support. Staff received training relevant to their roles and had regular supervision meetings to discuss and review their development and performance.
Staff supported people to stay safe, both at home and in the community, and to maintain good health in a way that took account of their needs and personal circumstances. Staff developed positive and caring relationships with the people they supported and their families, all of whom they clearly knew very well.
Staff made every effort to ascertain people’s wishes and obtain their consent before providing personal care and support. Parents and social care professionals, together with the people concerned wherever possible, were involved in the planning, delivery and reviews of the care and support provided. The confidentiality of information held about people’s medical and personal histories was securely maintained.
Parents and relatives told us that support was provided in a way that promoted their family member’s dignity and respected their privacy. People received care and support that met their needs and took account of their preferences. Staff were very knowledgeable about their preferences and routines which they used to good effect in delivering person centred care.
People were supported to pursue interests and take part in activities of their choosing, both at home and in the community. Parents and relatives felt that staff listened to them and responded to any concerns they had in a positive way. They knew how to complain should the need arise but told us they had never had cause to do so.
Families, staff and professional stakeholders were very complimentary about the registered manager and how the service was operated. Effective arrangements were in place to monitor risks and the quality of services provided.