The inspection took place on 18 February 2016 and was announced. The provider was given 48 hours’ notice because the organisation provides a domiciliary care service to people in their own homes and we needed to be sure that someone would be available at the office. Freetime Care Services Limited provides personal care and support for people with learning disabilities who live in their own homes. At the time of our inspection two people received care and support. Some people had autism and needed support with their complex needs and behaviour.
The services to people varied from daily support in their home to providing respite support in their own home.
CQC regulates the personal care activity that Freetime Care Services Limited provides to people in their own home. This report relates only to these activities and not the day care provision provided from this location.
At the last inspection in July 2014 the service was meeting the regulations that we looked at.
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 were supported by staff who had been trained and understood their role and responsibilities in protecting people from harm or abuse. The safety of people who used the service was taken seriously. Risks to people’s safety and wellbeing were identified and addressed.
Staff were recruited in a safe way and there were enough trained and experienced staff to support people and meet their needs in a personalised manner. The management team monitored staffing levels and provided enough staff to support people safely in their own home. There was an effective out of hour’s support system for staff from the management team to ensure people’s well-being.
Staff were not required to support people with their medicines on a regularly basis. We saw staff had been trained in medicine management and that policies and procedures were in place and checks were undertaken to ensure staff practiced in a safe way.
We found staff had excellent access to training to meet people’s individual and sometimes complex needs. People had consistency and continuity from staff who had been matched with them. External professionals told us that they were highly impressed with the training and competencies of staff.
There was a proactive support system in place for staff. The registered manager had created a clear structure so that staff received regular supervision as well as ‘team’ opportunities to reflect on their practice. Staff felt extremely well supported and there was a system for recognising and awarding staff for their performance.
People were supported to understand information about their care and support. People’s preferred methods of communication had been considered and they were involved in identifying their needs and how they would like to be supported.
People’s consent to care and support was sought and respected. We saw people were encouraged to make their own decisions and staff understood the need to seek their consent.
People were supported by staff who understood their particular eating routines and the importance of maintaining a healthy diet. People maintained control over their own health care needs with the support of their relatives. There were excellent links with healthcare professionals and we saw staff sought professional advice so that people experienced good health outcomes that promoted their wellbeing.
People were supported by staff who knew them well were kind and encouraged them to remain living in their homes. People were actively involved in planning their care and in providing feedback on the service. Staff understood and promoted people’s privacy and dignity when delivering personal care in their home.
There was an excellent understanding of the importance of putting people first. Staff were responsive to people’s specific needs and the service was organised around people’s preferences. We received some outstanding feedback from relatives and professionals who described the service as unique.
People were very complimentary about the management approach and attitude of the registered manager. The registered manager had used their knowledge about the needs of people using the service to tailor the support to people in their own home. Staff had an excellent understanding of people’s diversity and had been innovative in gaining people’s trust so that people could accept support in their own homes.
The structures in place enabled the registered manager to deliver the support people wanted and needed. Quality monitoring systems were effective and checks were completed to ensure improvements were identified and actioned. People using the service, their relatives and staff were actively encouraged to contribute to the evaluation of the service and make recommendations for improvement. There was a consistently high level of positive feedback from people who used the service. People felt they received consistent personalised care and support.