Archived: Blandford Office

Updated 20 December 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 announced inspection took place on 19 and 20 November 2018. We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection visit because we needed to be sure that the registered manager would be in.

The inspection team included a lead 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 spoke with six people by telephone to get their views of the service they received. The people we contacted had given their permission for us to call and speak with them.

The inspection site visit started on 19 November 2018 and continued on 20 November 2018. We visited the office on both days to meet with the registered manager and office staff; and to review care records and policies and procedures. We visited five people in their own homes to make general observations, check records and speak with them about their care. The people we visited had given their permission for this to happen.

We used the information the provider sent us in the Provider Information Return (PIR). This is information we require providers to supply at least once annually to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We reviewed information we held about the service including notifications of incidents. A notification is the way providers tell us important information that affects the care people receive.

During the home visits we spoke with five people using the service and five relatives. We also spoke with the registered manager, chief executive officer, office manager, locality manager and two care staff.

We looked at five people's care plans. We also looked at records relating to the management of the service including rotas, training, medicine administration records, meeting minutes and the recruitment information for five staff. After the inspection we spoke with a district nurse and a GP to understand their experience of working with the service.

Updated 20 December 2018

This inspection took place on 19 and 20 November 2018 and was announced.

Blandford Office is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to 72 people living in their own houses and flats in the community. It provides a service to older people and younger adults some of whom have a physical disability, sensory impairment or dementia.

Not everyone using Blandford Office receives a 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.

The service had a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People’s risks were assessed and control measures put in place. Staff had a good understanding of the risks people faced and how to minimise them. People told us they felt safe and their relatives felt that their loved ones were kept safe.

People were supported by staff who had received safeguarding training and knew how to keep people safe from harm or abuse. Staff were able to confidently tell us how they would report concerns of potential harm or abuse both internally or external to the service if required.

The service had a recruitment and selection process that helped reduce the risk of unsuitable staff supporting people. People received their medicines on time and as prescribed. Staff understood the importance of infection prevention and control and wore personal protective equipment appropriately when supporting people. Accidents and incidents were logged, analysed and the learning from these shared with the team to reduce the chance of them happening again.

People were involved in decisions about their care and subsequent reviews. People were supported by staff who understood the importance of offering choice and support in line with what they needed and wanted. 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. Staff consistently asked for people’s consent before offering to support them. Where people lacked capacity to make particular decisions they were supported by staff who were trained and practiced in line with the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

Staff consistently demonstrated a kind and caring approach towards people. One person told us, “As far as I’m concerned they are very good. They treat me very well.” People’s privacy and dignity was supported at all times. Staff were respectful towards people and knew them well. People were encouraged to maintain their independence. One person said, “I haven’t met anybody that interferes.” The service recognised people’s diversity and was promoting a workshop for staff to increase their awareness of people’s support needs in later life when they do not family.

People were supported in line with their assessed needs. Where people’s needs changed their package of care was amended to reflect this. People felt the service listened to them and made changes to support their requests. People and their relatives knew how to complain and told us they had confidence that any issues would be investigated and resolved to their satisfaction. We saw that complaints had been resolved in line with the service’s policy.

Staff had been trained in providing end of life care and had given support to people and their relatives on these occasions. Feedback from people’s families demonstrated the high regard they had for the support they and their loved ones had received from staff at these times.

There was an open and supportive culture at the service. Staff were encouraged to contribute their views and ideas. The staff got on well and told us they enjoyed working for the service. One staff member said, “I love everything about my job.” Staff told us they felt supported and listened to. Staff achievements were recognised, shared with them and celebrated.

Staff were given opportunities and support to achieve qualifications or gain further knowledge to help improve their practice and promote career progression. Regular communication had helped develop and maintain a team focused on providing a good service that always looked to improve. The service sought feedback from people, staff, and relatives via surveys and forums.

A range of audits were undertaken to help maintain the quality of the service and identify where improvements could be made.

The service had established and maintained good working relationships with other agencies such as community nurses and GP surgeries. This had supported people to remain well in their homes for longer and to prevent unnecessary hospital admissions.