Radis Community Care (Fernleigh)

Updated 1 February 2019

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection checked whether the provider was 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 inspection took place on 10 January 2019 and was an announced inspection. We told the provider two days before our visit that we would be coming. We did this because the registered manager is sometimes out of the office supporting staff or visiting people who use the service. We needed to be sure that someone would be in. This inspection was conducted by one 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.

Before the inspection we looked at previous inspection reports and notifications received from the provider. A notification is information about important events which the provider is required to tell us about by law. This ensured we were addressing any areas of concern. In addition, we looked at a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

We spoke with three people, two relatives, two care staff, the team leader, the area operations manager and the registered manager. We looked at five people's care records, four staff files and medicine administration records. We also looked at a range of records relating to the management of the service.

Updated 1 February 2019

We undertook an announced inspection of OSJCT Fernleigh on 10 January 2019.

Fernleigh offers domiciliary care and 24 hour emergency cover for people living in self-contained flats. The accommodation is either rented or shared ownership and is contained in a new building, located in Witney Oxfordshire. On the day of our inspection 19 people were receiving a personal care service.

At our last inspection we rated the service good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

There was 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.

We were greeted warmly by staff at the service. The atmosphere was open and friendly.

People told us they benefitted from caring relationships with the staff. There were sufficient staff to meet people’s needs and people received their care when they expected. Staffing levels and visit schedules were consistently maintained. The service had safe, robust recruitment processes.

People were safe. Staff understood their responsibilities in relation to safeguarding. Staff had received regular training to make sure they stayed up to date with recognising and reporting safety concerns. The service had systems in place to notify the appropriate authorities where concerns were identified.

Where risks to people had been identified risk assessments were in place and action had been taken to manage the risks. This included risks associated with infection control. Staff were aware of people’s needs and followed guidance to keep them safe. People received their medicine as prescribed.

Staff had a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and applied its principles in their work. The MCA protects the rights of people who may not be able to make particular decisions themselves. The registered manager was knowledgeable about the MCA and how to ensure the rights of people who lacked capacity were protected.

People were treated as individuals by staff committed to respecting people’s individual preferences. The service’s diversity policy supported this culture. Care plans were person centred and people had been actively involved in developing their support plans.

People told us they were confident they would be listened to and action would be taken if they raised a concern. We saw a complaints policy and procedure was in place. The service had systems to assess the quality of the service provided. Learning was identified and action taken to make improvements which improved people’s safety and quality of life. Systems were in place that ensured people were protected against the risks of unsafe or inappropriate care.

Staff spoke positively about the support they received from the registered manager. Staff supervision and meetings were scheduled as were annual appraisals. Staff told us the registered manager was approachable and there was a good level of communication within the service.

People told us the service was friendly, responsive and well managed. People knew the registered manager and staff and spoke positively about them. The service sought people’s views and opinions and acted upon them.