Duke Street

Updated 23 February 2018

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 comprehensive inspection took place on 03 January 2018 and was announced. We gave 48 hours’ notice of our inspection, because the location provides a domiciliary care service and we needed to make sure someone would be in the office when we visited.

The inspection team was made up of one inspector and an expert-by-experience. An expert-by-experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service. The expert-by experience had experience of people who used regulated services.

Before our inspection, we reviewed information we held about the service, which included information shared with the CQC and notifications sent to us since our last inspection. Notifications are when providers send us information about certain changes, events or incidents that occur and which affect their service or the people who use it.

We used information the provider sent us in the Provider Information Return to plan our inspection. 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.

During the inspection, we visited two people who used the service in their homes and spoke with three people and three relatives on the telephone. We visited the provider’s office and spoke with the registered manager, a team leader and two care workers.

We reviewed four people’s care plans and risk assessments, plus the recruitment, training, supervision and appraisal records for three members of staff. We looked at medication administration records, meeting minutes, audits and other records relating to the running of the service.

Following the inspection we spoke with two health and social care professionals and a commissioner of the service for their feedback on their experiences of the care provided.

Updated 23 February 2018

Duke Street is a domiciliary care agency which provides personal care to people living in their own homes. This is a time limited service, up to a six weeks period, with the aim of assisting people to regain their independence after an accident, illness, or temporary disability.

This inspection took place on 3 January 2018 and was announced. The provider was given 48 hours’ notice of our inspection, because we needed to make sure someone would be in the location office when we visited. At the time of our inspection, the service supported approximately 13 mainly older people.

Not everyone using Duke Street receives regulated activity; CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also take into account any wider social care provided.

At the last inspection we rated the service good. At this inspection the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and on-going 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.

The service had a registered manager. 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.

The service provided safe care to people. Staff had received training in safeguarding adults and understood their responsibilities to identify and report any concerns. The provider had robust procedures to ensure effective recruitment of staff. There were sufficient staff employed to meet people's needs.

Assessments and care plans were person centred and provided guidance to staff on how to safely meet people's needs. Medicines were managed safely and people received their medicines as prescribed to people who needed this support.

People received effective care from staff who had the skills and knowledge to support them. Peoples health needs were promoted and when required support was provided with nutrition and hydration.

People were supported to have choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the procedures in the service supported this practice

The service provided support in a caring way. People benefited from caring relationships with staff who treated them with dignity and respect. People were involved in their care and supported to remain independent.

People received personalised care by staff who understood people's individual needs and preferences. People's changing needs were responded to appropriately and their preferences and choices respected.

The service continued to be well led by a registered manager and provider. Systems were in place for checking the quality of the service using audits and satisfaction surveys.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.