7 February 2018
During a routine inspection
Mencap in Kirklees is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to adults with learning disabilities living in their own homes. On the day of our inspection 22 people were receiving support from Mencap in Kirklees. The care service has been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen.
The service had a registered manager in place. 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 felt safe, staff were aware of their responsibilities in the event they were concerned a person was at risk of harm. Care files contained individual risk assessments to reduce risks to people’s safety and welfare.
Staff recruitment was safe. Plans were in place to implement an electronic call monitoring system to alert office based staff in the event a person’s call had been missed. Not all staff were happy with the management of duty rotas.
People’s medicines were only administered by staff with the knowledge and skills to do so. All medicine administration records were routinely audited on return to the office to enable any concerns to be addressed promptly. Where people were prescribed medicines to be taken ‘as required’ (PRN) there were no directions for staff as to how to ensure their administration was safe and consistent. The registered manager assured us action would be taken to address this shortfall.
New staff received induction and there was a system in place to ensure staff received regular training. Staff had completed the theory aspect of the Care Certificate but the field based assessment of their competency had not always been completed. Staff had not received regular management supervision and there was no system to ensure all staff had received a regular field based performance assessment.
People received support with meals and drinks. Care plans recorded the support people needed with this aspect of their lives.
Staff were aware of how to access additional healthcare support for people and we saw evidence of this within peoples care files.
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. We saw evidence people had given their consent to the care and support they were receiving.
Staff were caring and kind. People’s right to privacy was respected and staff treated people with dignity. People were encouraged to retain their independence and complete tasks with staff support. People and their relatives were involved in their care plan and this was evident in the care plans we reviewed. Staff enabled people to make their own choices and decisions, implementing other methods of communication where people’s verbal skills were limited.
Staff supported people to engage in activities which interested them.
Care plans were person-centred and contained relevant information to enable staff to deliver peoples care. Where people may present behaviour which may challenge others, we saw care plans recorded how the behaviour was displayed and the actions staff should take to defuse the behaviour.
People did not raise any complaints with us and information about how to raise a complaint about the service was easily accessible for people who used the service.
There was a system of governance in place. The group manager completed an audit of the service and action plan was implemented to address any identified shortfalls. The organisation had recently achieved external accreditation regarding their management systems. Feedback was gained from people who used the service and staff on a regular basis. This information was included in an annual performance report which was shared with people, their relatives and staff.