Archived: DAC Cornwall

Updated 5 May 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.

The inspection of DAC Cornwall took place on 16 and 17 April 2018. We gave the service 24 hours notice of the inspection visit because the location provides a domiciliary care service and we needed to be sure that staff would be at the office. The inspection was carried out by one adult social care inspector.

Before the inspection we reviewed the information we held about the service and notifications of incidents we had received. A notification is information about important events which the service is required to send us by law.

During the inspection we went to the service’s office and spoke with the registered manager, the care manager, the administrator and one care worker. We looked at five records relating to the care of individuals, three staff recruitment files, staff duty rosters, staff training records and records relating to the running of the service.

We visited three people in their own homes, meeting a relative and two care staff. Following the visit to the service’s office we had telephone conversations with three people, two relatives and three care staff.

Updated 5 May 2018

We carried out this announced inspection on 16 and 17 April 2018. We gave the service 24 hours notice of the inspection visit because the location provides a domiciliary care service and we needed to be sure that staff would be at the office. This was the first inspection for the service, previously known as Ansom Home Care, since it changed ownership in July 2017 and registered as a new provider in March 2018.

DAC Cornwall provides personal care to mostly older people living in their own homes in the community. It provides a service to older adults in the St Austell, Bodmin and Wadebridge areas of Cornwall. The service mainly provides personal care for people in short visits at key times of the day to help people get up in the morning, go to bed at night and support with meals. At the time of our inspection 54 people were receiving a personal care service. These services were funded either privately, through Cornwall Council or NHS funding.

Staff were knowledgeable about the people they cared for and knew how to recognise if people’s needs changed. Staff were aware of people’s preferences and interests, as well as their health and support needs, which enabled them to provide a personalised service. Staff had received training in how to recognise and report abuse. All were clear about how to report any concerns and were confident that any allegations made would be fully investigated to help ensure people were protected.

People, and their relatives, told us they were happy with the care they received and believed it was a safe service. Staff treated people respectfully and asked people how they wanted their care and support to be provided. People and their relatives commented, “No complaints at all”, “I am quite happy with the service”, “I’m in good hands” and “They are fantastic and I can stay in my own home.”

The management team employed enough staff to ensure the service was run safely and effectively. New packages of care were only accepted if there were enough suitably qualified staff available. Staff rotas were planned in advance and people received a reliable service from staff who could respond to people’s needs. A number of staff had left in recent months and new staff had been recruited to the vacancies. Some people told us there had been, “A high turnover of staff” and “We have had lots of new staff.” However, we found the impact on service provision, of the high staff turnover, had been minimised and well-managed.

People told us they received a reliable service, had agreed the times of their visits and were kept informed of any changes. No one reported that any of their visits had been missed. People told us, “Staff always arrive on time, if not they phone to let me know”, “Timings of visits are fine” and “Staff always stay for the full time.”

Care plans provided staff with direction and guidance about how to meet people’s individual needs and wishes. These care plans were regularly reviewed and any changes in people’s needs were communicated to staff. People who needed help taking their medicines were appropriately supported by staff. Assessments were carried out to identify any risks to the person using the service and to the staff supporting them. This included any environmental risks in people’s homes and any risks in relation to the care and support needs of the person.

People’s rights were protected by staff who under stood the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and how this applied to their role. Nobody we spoke with said they felt they had been subject to any discriminatory practice for example on the grounds of their gender, race, sexuality, disability or age.

The service had robust recruitment practices to help ensure staff had the skills and knowledge to meet people’s needs and were safe to work in a care environment. New staff completed a thorough induction programme prior to providing people's care. The induction was effective and fully complied with the requirements of the Care Certificate. Training records showed staff had been provided with all the necessary training which had been refreshed regularly. Staff told us, “Training is really good” and they found the training to be beneficial to their role. Staff said they were encouraged to attend training to develop their skills, and their career.

There was a positive culture within the staff team and staff spoke passionately about their work. Staff were complimentary about the management team and how they were supported to carry out their work. The management were clearly committed to providing a good service for people. Comments from staff included, “The office staff are really helpful” and “Our rotas are well organised.”

There were robust systems in place to monitor the quality of the service provided and to seek people's views about the service. The management welcomed feedback and used the results of surveys and any complaints to drive improvement. People told us they were regularly asked for their views about the quality of the service they received. People had details of how to raise a complaint and told us they would be happy to make a complaint if they needed to.