Archived: Potens Domiciliary Care Agency

This service was last inspected in April 2016 and was rated 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.

Potens Domiciliary Care Agency provides 24-hour support to people who have learning disabilities and or mental health needs. This service provides care and support to people living in five supported living settings, this type of support enables people in their own homes to be as independent as possible. People's care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. CQC does not regulate premises used for supported living; this inspection looked at people's personal care and support. This service also provides an outreach service and provides support to 14 people living in their own homes within the community.

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.

Support plans were detailed and person centred. Risks to people's safety and well-being had been identified and plans put in place to minimise any identified risk. Medicines were managed safely and staff had the appropriate training to support people effectively.

Staff were recruited safely and then supported in their roles with induction, training, supervision and appraisal. Ongoing competency checks were also completed. There were adequate staff on duty to safely support the people receiving the service. Each supported living home had their own on call system in case of emergencies, this included the outreach service.

The provider had systems in place to ensure that people were protected from the risk of harm or abuse. We saw there were policies and procedures in place to guide staff in relation to safeguarding adults and whistleblowing.

Support plans showed that people's GPs and other healthcare professionals were contacted for advice about people's health needs whenever necessary. We saw the service had responded promptly when people had experienced health problems.

People who used the service that we spoke with all gave positive feedback about the support received. The service had a relaxed feel and people could move freely around their own homes as they chose. People were able to have control over their lives and participate in activities they enjoyed.

Policies and procedures were in place and updated, such as infection control, safeguarding, complaints, medication and other health and safety topics. The service had quality assurance processes in place including audits, staff meetings and quality questionnaires. The people and the relatives we spoke with had no complaints about the service.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

The service is required to have a 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. At the time of our visit the service had a registered manager who had been in post for several years. We last inspected this service on 1 November 2013 when we found compliance in all of the areas we looked at.

We spoke with the registered manager at the head office and visited the four supported living services where we met staff and people who had tenancies there. Most people were independent in daily living.

There were enough staff to meet people’s support needs and the staff we spoke with had good knowledge of the people they supported. Each supported living house had its own manager, known as a coordinator. The largest service had a coordinator, a deputy coordinator and three senior support workers. The smaller services had one senior support worker. The manager told us that recruitment was on-going as it could be difficult to recruit and retain suitable staff. Bank and agency staff were used to cover shortfalls. New staff were recruited safely.

People who were supported by the service had a tenancy in a shared property. Where people lived in supported living premises, the staff who supported them carried out regular environmental health and safety checks. Staff supported people with medication and records we looked at showed that this was done safely and people received the medication prescribed by their doctor.

Staff encouraged people, and supported if needed, to attend health checks and medical appointments. The care plans we looked at gave details of people’s medical history and medication, and information about the person’s life and their preferences.

Various methods of monitoring the quality of the service were implemented including daily checks, monthly audits, and satisfaction surveys. A monthly key worker summary was written for each of the people who used the service and monthly tenants meetings were held. An annual satisfaction survey was conducted for people who used the service, their relatives, visiting professionals, and staff. Comments forms were readily available for visitors to the services to complete.

.All necessary checks had been undertaken in the recruitment of staff and a regular training programme for all staff ensured they had the knowledge, skills and experience to support the people who lived at the services.

A schedule of audits and an annual survey for people to feedback their views ensured that the quality of the service was monitored regularly.

People we spoke to said that staff treated them with dignity and respect and treated them kindly at all times. They told us:

'Staff are really nice people

'Talk to me nice'

'Treat me with respect, nice, calmly'

Care records showed that people's individual needs and preferences had been taken into account and that people had been given a choice in how they wished to be cared for. Care records showed that a person's independence was actively supported. Care records had been regularly reviewed and updated when a person's needs had changed.

Staff were knowledgeable about a person's care and gave examples of how they treated people with respect and dignity and promoted people's independence.

All necessary checks to safeguard people against abuse had been undertaken in the employment of staff and a regular training programme for all staff ensured they had the qualifications, skills and experience to undertake personal care.

Staff we spoke to had a good knowledge of safeguarding and what to do if they suspected abuse was happening. Safeguarding and whistle blowing polices were in place and staff had regular training in safeguarding.

A schedule of audits and an annual survey for people to feedback their views ensured that the quality of the service was regularly monitored.