15 February 2019
During a routine inspection
People’s experience of using this service:
We could not speak with the person using the service or their parents to ask for feedback on the service they received. This meant that we had to base our judgement on what the manager and staff told us as well as the information we reviewed when we visited the service’s office. Following our visit to the office we had a meeting with the provider and the manager of the service to discuss the provider`s plans to develop the service.
The person who received support in their own home regularly used another respite service owned by the provider. Staff working in the respite service supported the person twice a week with personal care in their own home.
A specific care plan was not developed for the care the person received in their own home. The care plan from the respite service had been used to provide the care. Staff told us they knew how to support the person safely because they were supporting them for a long time.
Risk assessments were developed to assess health risk and risk when using equipment, however these were not specific to the support the person received in their own home.
Staff told us they received training relevant to their roles, however this did not always include training relevant to staff who supported adults.
The provider had no effective governance systems in place for this service as only one person was using this service at the time of inspection. However, they sent us their action plan to evidence how they were planning to develop the service and implement robust governance systems.
Rating at last inspection: Good. (Last report published on 20 May 2016).
Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the rating at the last inspection.
Follow up: We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service to ensure the next inspection is scheduled accordingly.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk