Background to this inspection
Updated
21 April 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 was an announced inspection. We gave the manager five days’ notice of the inspection site visits. This was because the service is small and the manager is often out of the office supporting staff or providing care and we needed to be sure that they would be available. This announced inspection was carried out by one inspector and an expert by experience. The expert by experience had knowledge of care services including domiciliary services. The inspection site visit activity started on 19 March 2018 and ended on 21 March 2018.
The inspection was informed by the information we held about the service and the provider. This included notifications the provider had sent to us about significant events at the service. We used information the provider sent us in the Provider Information Return. This is information we require providers to send us at least once annually to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We used all this information to formulate our inspection plan.
At the inspection we gave the provider the opportunity to send us further information including the service improvement plan. We asked for this information to be provided up to 48 hours after the inspection. We have not received any additional information from the provider for us to consider.
We used a range of different methods to help us understand people’s experiences. We made telephone calls to six people who used the service and three relatives. We also visited one person in their home. We spoke with two members of care staff, the registered manager and the area manager. During the office visit we looked at the care records for eight people. We checked that the care they received matched the information in their records. We also looked at records relating to the management of the service, including audits carried out, staff rosters and safeguarding, complaints and the infection control policy. We also looked at four staff files so we were able to review the provider’s recruitment process.
Updated
21 April 2018
The inspection took place on 19 and 21 March 2018 and was announced. This service provides care and support to people living in specialist ‘extra care’ housing. Extra care housing is purpose-built or adapted single household accommodation in a shared site or building. The accommodation is bought or rented, and is the occupant’s own home. People’s care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. CQC does not regulate premises used for extra care housing; this inspection looked at people’s personal care service.
Rapid response community care is registered to provide personal care support to older people who live in their own apartments within the housing complex. There are 135 apartments and at the time of our inspection, 26 people received personal care support visits. This is the first inspection since the provider changed in 2017.
There were some systems in place to monitor the service however the information that was highlighted through the audit process was not always used to drive improvements through the service.
People were supported in a safe way. Individual risks to people were considered and staff had the information available to keep people safe. Staff understood safeguarding procedures and when to report concerns. Staff working within the home had checks to ensure their suitability. When people needed support with the management of medicines this was provided for them. The provider had systems in place to ensure lessons were learnt when things went wrong. There were enough staff available to offer support to people. There were infection control procedures in place and these were followed by staff.
People enjoyed the food and were offered a choice and people’s individual needs and preferences were considered in this and other areas. When needed, people had information available to them in different formats to help them understand the choices they were making. We found people were happy with the staff and the care they received. People’s cultural needs had also been considered by the provider. People were encouraged to remain independent and make choices for themselves, including the activities they participated in. People’s privacy and dignity was also considered. When people needed support from health professionals this was provided for them and the registered manager worked in partnership with these agencies.
The provider had responded to complaints in line with their procedures. Staff felt supported be the management team and were happy to raise concerns. There was a registered manager in post and they understood their responsibility around registration with us. People are supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff support them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service support this practice.