Archived: Diagonal Alternatives LLP

Updated 9 January 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 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.

The inspection was announced and took place on 26, 27 and 31 October 2017. We gave short notice that we would be visiting as we needed to be sure someone would be in at the office. The inspection was carried out by two adult social care inspectors 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, the provider had completed 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 reviewed the PIR and other information we held about the service prior to our inspection. This included the notifications we had received from the provider. Notifications are changes, events or incidents the provider is legally obliged to send us within required timescales. We contacted a local authority commissioner and Healthwatch, the local consumer champion for health and social care services.

During our inspection we had telephone contact with six people using the service, four relatives and two care workers to obtain their feedback. At our visit to the office we talked with the registered manager, the supervisor and two administrators. We examined four people’s care records, staff recruitment, training and supervision, and reviewed other records related to the management and quality of the service.

Updated 9 January 2018

Diagonal Alternatives LLP is a domiciliary care service that provides personal care to older people and younger adults in their own homes. At the time of the inspection 16 people were using the service.

At the last inspection in August 2015 we had rated the service as ‘Good’. At this inspection we found the service remained ‘Good’.

We found the service had established systems to safeguard people from harm and respond to any alleged abuse. Action was taken to identify and reduce risks to the personal safety and welfare of people using the service.

There was sufficient staffing to safely meet people’s needs. Staff were given support, training and supervision to enable them to care for people effectively.

People were suitably assisted in taking their prescribed medicines and maintaining their health. Appropriate arrangements were in place for meeting people’s nutritional needs.

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

People and their relatives gave positive feedback about their experiences of using the service. They had formed relationships with staff and spoke highly of their caring, respectful approach.

The service involved people in making decisions about their care and was flexible in accommodating their requests. Any complaints made were taken seriously and responded to.

Care planning was very personalised to the needs and preferences of the individual, and adapted if their needs changed. Staff offered companionship and support to help prevent social isolation.

The management provided leadership and promoted an inclusive culture. Standards were monitored to ensure the quality and safety of the service were maintained and improved.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.