Richmond Village Witney DCA

Updated 9 December 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 and 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 7 November 2017 and was announced. We told the provider two days before our visit that we would be coming. We did this because the manager is sometimes out of the office supporting staff or visiting people who use the service. We needed to be sure that they would be in. The inspection was carried out by one inspector.

Before the inspection we reviewed the information we held about the service and the service provider. The registered provider completed a 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. We contacted a number of external professionals to obtain their views about the service. We also looked at the notifications we had received for this service. Notifications are information about important events the service is required to send us by law.

On the day of the inspection we spoke with three people who used the service and their relatives. We also spoke with the village manager, the registered manager, one care staff and one team leader. We looked at three people’s care records and three staff files that included their recruitment, supervision and training records. We also viewed a range of records about how the service was managed.

Updated 9 December 2017

We inspected Richmond Village Witney DCA on 7 November 2017. This service is a domiciliary care agency that provides personal care to adults living in their own flats and apartments within the retirement village. At the time of our inspection 9 people were supported by the service under the registered regulated activity of personal care. People’s support was provided on a scheduled visit basis and a rapid response in the case of emergency was also available. Other people were receiving other support such as help with housekeeping tasks, but their experiences were not included in our inspection.

There was a registered manager in post. 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.

People told us they were safe. There were sufficient staff to keep people safe. Appropriate checks were carried out before staff started to work to make sure they were suitable to work with people. The provider had safeguarding procedures in place and staff knew how to escalate any concerns.

No people received support with their medicines at the time of our inspection, however staff had received training should they need to assist people with taking their prescribed medicine.

The Care Quality Commission (CQC) is required by law to monitor the operation of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and report on what we find. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the systems in the service supported this practice. People told us staff respected their decisions.

People's needs were assessed prior to commencement of the service to ensure these could be met. People's care records were current and contained details of people's personal preferences, wishes, life histories and support required. Risks to people’s well-being were assessed and guidance was available to staff how to minimise these risks. People’s care plans outlined people’s dietary preferences and needs and people were supported to access health professionals when required.

People complimented the staff and their caring nature. People’s dignity, privacy and confidentiality were respected. Staff respected ways in which people wanted to be supported. Staff were positive about their work and told us they enjoyed their roles. Staff received relevant training and told us they were well supported.

The provider’s complaints policy was available to people and concerns and complaints were managed appropriately. People had opportunities to feedback their views and the information received acted upon.

The provider had quality assurance systems in place to monitor the service people received. The team worked well with other professionals including local health professionals to ensure people received support that met their needs. The registered manager met their legal statutory requirements to inform the relevant authorities of notifiable incidents.