13 December 2017
During a routine inspection
This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care including nursing to 177 people living in their own houses and flats in the community. It provides a service to older adults, younger disabled adults and children.
Not everyone using Somerset Care Community (South Somerset) 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 time of the inspection there was a manager in post applying to be the 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. They were supported by a care manager to run the service and the operations manager. On the first day of inspection a registered manager from another of the provider’s services came to support the manager.
Some people with specific health conditions did not have enough guidance for staff to follow to ensure their needs were met consistently. People’s medicine was usually administered safely and in line with their needs. Improvements were required with the medicine administration records. Most accidents and incidents had lessons learnt identified and action taken. Sometimes these actions had not been recorded fully.
Risk assessments were carried out to enable people to retain their independence and receive care with minimum risk to themselves or others. People were protected from potential abuse because staff were able to recognise signs and knew how to report it. People had a mixed opinion about whether there were enough staff; the management were taking actions to improve this. Some people did not feel their call times considered their medication needs which the management were going to review.
The provider and manager wanted to provide high quality care for people. People had mixed opinions about the management because they felt changes had not been communicated to them. There was a positive approach to improving the service. Staff felt supported and the new manager and provider had brought about positive improvements. The management had systems to monitor the quality of the service and made improvements in accordance with people’s changing needs. They had completed statutory notifications in line with legislation to inform external agencies of significant events.
People were supported to have choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. When people lacked capacity actions to ensure the statutory principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 had not always been recorded. People and their relatives were positive about the food and meals were prepared to meet people’s needs and wishes.
Staff had the skills and knowledge required to effectively support people. People and their relatives told us their healthcare needs were met and staff supported them to see other health and social care professionals. Staff were proactive in identifying when people’s health started to decline.
People and their relatives told us, and we observed that staff were kind and patient. People’s privacy and dignity was respected by staff and their religious needs were valued. When people had specific needs or differences they had been considered by staff. People, or their representatives, were involved in decisions about the care and support they received.
Most care and support was personalised to each person which ensured they were able to make choices about their care. People and their relatives knew how to complain. There was a complaints policy and complaints had been managed. There were occasions the outcomes had not been communicated with the relevant people.