The inspection took place on 5 July 2016. Montague House is a domiciliary care service that provides support and personal care to adults living in the community either alone or with family or friends. On the day of inspection the service was supporting seven people with a range of health and social care needs, such as people with a physical disability, sensory impairment or people living with dementia. Support was tailored according to people’s assessed needs within the context of people’s individual preferences and lifestyles to help people to live and maintain independent lives. Staff who supported people using the service were known as personal assistants and are referred to as personal assistants throughout the report.The service had 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 said they felt safe. One person told us, “Knowing that they always turn up makes me feel safe.” However the recruitment process for staff was not robust. The provider had not undertaken the required pre-employment checks to ensure that staff employed were of good character and were suitable to work with people. The registered manager immediately addressed this when it was brought to their attention.
Staff had received training in safeguarding adults with regular updates. Staff had a good understanding of their responsibilities regarding keeping people safe and how to recognise abuse and report any concerns. Staff had been subject to appropriate checks through the Disclosure and Barring Service.
People were supported to take make decisions about taking risks and to maintain active independent lives. There were environmental and individual risk assessments in place that were reviewed and updated regularly to guide staff and minimise the risk of harm to people. Accidents and incidents were reported and monitored to ensure that appropriate actions were taken to prevent recurrence.
Staff were employed in dedicated teams to support people and rotas showed that there were sufficient staff employed to cover any absences and to provide flexibility for people to live their lives as they chose. One person told us, “They are absolutely brilliant; they provide me with a personal assistant who comes when it suits me.” Each person also had an emergency contingency plan in place to ensure continuity of service should there be an unforeseen period of staff absence.
Staff were trained to give medicines and the registered manager undertook spot checks to ensure staff were competent and administering medicines correctly.
Staff had the knowledge and skills to support people. One person said, “They know exactly what they are doing, they are well trained.” There was an induction process and a training plan in place for essential training such as, emergency first aid and Health and Safety. Staff also received training specific to the person they were employed to support. Staff received regular, documented supervision from the registered manager and they said that they felt supported and listened to.
People were supported to make choices and decisions in their day to day lives. Where people were assessed to have fluctuating mental capacity this was reflected in their individual support plans with guidance to staff on how to gently support them at times when they lacked capacity to make day to day decisions.
People were supported to maintain adequate nutrition and hydration through risk assessment and detailed individual plans. Staff were knowledgeable about people’s needs and preferences around food and followed guidelines where specific nutritional needs had been identified.
Staff monitored people’s health and wellbeing and supported them to access routine and emergency health care appropriately. Where people had complex health needs there was detailed guidance in place for staff to follow.
Positive relationships had developed between staff and people. Staff knew people well and supported them thoughtfully and with empathy. People were involved in selecting the staff who supported them and were included in team meetings. They had control of their lives and chose when, where and how support was delivered.
The provider was dedicated to supporting people to live independent lives by providing a flexible person centred service. A member of staff said, “We make the impossible possible.” People received personalised care that was responsive to their needs. People were fully involved in planning and reviewing their support and the provider sought feedback through surveys and regular reviews. People were supported to follow interests and maintain relationships through flexible staffing arrangements. A member of staff said that they were, “Supporting (the person) every day to be productive.”
People, staff and health care professionals spoke positively of the registered manager and service. A member of staff told us, “If I am feeling a bit unsure I can just call her up to ask.” The registered manager undertook regular reviews and spot checks to ensure that support delivered was appropriate, safe and met people’s needs. The quality assurance system was appropriate and the provider was working on expanding its scope as the service grew. There was a complaints procedure in place and people and health professionals told us that any issues or concerns were dealt with promptly and effectively.
We found one breach of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of this report.