Archived: Richmond Village Northampton DCA

Richmond Village Northampton DCA is a domiciliary care agency providing personal care to people living in their own apartments within Richmond Retirement Village in Northampton. At the time of inspection there were 24 people receiving personal care.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

The registered manager had been absent from the service since April 2019. An acting manager had been appointed who understood the provider’s culture. The acting manager was respected by staff and had continued to improve the service.

Staff understood their roles and responsibilities to safeguard people from the risk of harm. People were supported to access relevant health and social care professionals.

People received their care at the agreed times. People’s medicines were managed in a safe way. People’s risks were assessed at regular intervals or as their needs changed. Care plans informed staff how to provide care that mitigated these known risks.

People received care from staff they knew. Staff had a good understanding of people's needs, choices and preferences. People were encouraged to make decisions about how their care was provided and their privacy and dignity were protected and promoted. Staff gained people's consent before providing personal care.

People were involved in the planning of their care which was person centred and updated regularly. People were supported to express themselves, their views were acknowledged and acted upon. There was a complaints system in place and people were confident that any complaints would be responded to appropriately.

Staff were recruited using safe recruitment practices. Staff received training to enable them to meet people’s needs and were supported to carry out their roles.

The management team continually monitored the quality of the service, identifying issues and making changes to improve the care.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was Good (published 5 January 2017).

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.

There was a registered manager in post at the time of our inspection. 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.

The registered manager had values and a clear vision that was person centred and focussed on enabling people to live at home. All staff demonstrated a commitment to providing a service for people that met their individual needs. People had positive relationships with staff.

People were actively involved in decisions about their care and support needs. Staff provided people with information to enable them to make an informed decision and encouraged people to make their own choices.

People received safe care and support. Staff understood their role in safeguarding people and they knew how to report concerns. There were enough staff with the right skills and attitudes to meet people’s needs.

Staff had a full understanding of people’s support needs and had the skills and knowledge to meet them. Staff received updates to their training and had access to regular supervision and appraisal. Staff were clear about their roles and responsibilities in caring for people and received regular support from the registered manager.

Care records contained risk assessments and risk management plans to protect people from identified risks. They gave information for staff on the identified risks and informed staff on the measures required to minimise any risks. Staff were vigilant regarding people’s changing health needs and sought guidance from relevant healthcare professionals.

Staff were aware of the importance of managing complaints promptly and in line with the provider’s policy. Staff and people were confident that if they had any concerns they would be listened to and any concerns would be addressed.

The provider monitored the quality and safety of the service and staff regularly monitored the support people received. People and staff were encouraged to provide feedback about the service and it was used to drive continuous improvement.

There was a registered manager in recently in post at the time of our inspection. 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.

The new manager had recognised that the service required improvement in areas such as supervision of staff, additional and enhanced training in medicines management and more permanent staffing. They had identified the issues we found on inspection and had the support of the provider to implement their improvement plan.

People were safeguarded from physical harm or psychological distress arising from poor practice or ill treatment as staff understood their responsibilities to respond to allegations of abuse and protect people from harm.

People’s care plans were individualised and reflected the support they needed and that had been agreed with them. They benefited from receiving care from staff that listened to them and acted upon what they said. Staff encouraged and enabled people to retain as much independence as their capabilities allowed.

People who required help with their medicines were supported to order, store and take their medicines, however staff required further training to do so safely.

Appropriate risk assessments related to people’s support needs were in place and were acted upon by staff.

People’s quality of care was effectively monitored by the audits regularly conducted by the registered manager and the provider. People knew how and who to complain to. They were assured that they would be listened to and that appropriate remedial action would be taken to try to resolve matters to their satisfaction.

We also spoke with a relative who told us 'the staff communicate with us well and are respectful when they come into our home, they check before they come in to make sure its ok'.

All of the people we spoke with told us they were well cared for and the staff knew the care they needed and how they wished to be supported. One person said 'I am very well looked after here' and another person said 'the staff are very kind and I feel safe living here'.

People told us that they were supported by staff to prepare their own food and drinks in their apartments or were supported to access the on-site restaurant for their meals.

People told us they thought that there were adequate numbers of staff to support their needs and that staff had enough time allocated to be able to meet their needs.

All of the people we spoke with told us that they were satisfied with the quality of the service provided.