HF Trust - Sheffield & Derbyshire DCA is a domiciliary care service registered to provide personal care. The service’s office is based in the S8 area of Sheffield. The office is accessible to wheelchair users via a lift. The service provides personal care to people living in their own home or within shared tenancy accommodation. It provides a service to people with learning disabilities and/or autistic spectrum disorders. At the time of this inspection 90 people were supported by the service, 54 of those people were being provided with personal care. CQC does not regulate premises used for shared tenancy accommodation; this inspection looked at the quality of care being provided to people who received support with their personal care.

The operational manager and five registered cluster managers had registered with the CQC. 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 last inspection in December 2015, the service was rated good. At this inspection we found the service remained good.

Why the service is rated good.

People we spoke with did not express any concerns or worries about the service. Relatives did not express any concerns about the safety of their family member.

Staff had undertaken safeguarding training and were knowledgeable about their roles and responsibilities in keeping people safe from harm.

We found there were satisfactory arrangements in place for people who had monies managed by the service.

People received care from the same group of support staff and were introduced to any new staff who would be supporting them.

There were robust recruitment procedures in place so people were cared for by suitably qualified staff who had been assessed as safe to work with people.

Medicines were managed safely at the service.

There were sufficient staff to meet people’s needs.

All the people we spoke with told us they were satisfied with the quality of care they had received and made positive comments about the staff.

The service enabled people to carry out person centred activities within the service and in the community and encouraged them to maintain hobbies and interests.

Relatives told us they were satisfied with the quality of care provided to their family member.

People’s support plans were person centred. We saw examples of easy read support plans that people had been supported to create.

We saw evidence of involvement from other professionals such as, psychologists and speech and language practitioners in people’s support plans.

People’s nutritional needs were monitored and actions taken where this was part of their support plan.

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.

People told us they were treated with dignity and respect.

Staff told us they enjoyed caring and supporting people using the service. Staff were able to describe people’s individual needs, likes and dislikes.

All staff received a detailed induction and fully understood their roles and responsibilities. Staff received ongoing training and were encouraged to extend their knowledge and develop new skills.

Staff had received appropriate supervision and appraisal to enable them to carry out the duties they were employed to perform.

The registered provider had a complaint’s process in place to enable them to respond to people and/or their representative’s concerns, investigate them and take action to address their concerns. There was a copy of the easy read complaints process available in people’s support plans.

People and their family were regul

During our inspection visit we spoke with twelve members of staff, twelve people that used the service and three relatives. To do this we visited the office and spoke with the area manager, the manager and one service manager about the running of the agency. In addition, seven support workers came to the office so that we could talk to them about working for Home Farm Trust [HFT.]

Six people that received support from HFT were supported by staff to visit the office so that we could speak with them about their experiences of the support they received. We also visited two shared supported living houses and spoke with a further six people supported by HFT, a service manager and a support worker. People supported by HFT said they were "Happy."

We telephoned three relatives of people supported by HFT. They told us that they were "Very satisfied" with the agency.

We found that before people received any care and support they were asked for their opinion and agreement to ensure that staff acted in accordance with their wishes.

We found that people's care and support needs were assessed and each person had a written support plan that set out their identified needs and the actions required of staff to meet these.

We found that medicines were being handled and stored safely.

The provider had a satisfactory recruitment and selection procedure in place to ensure that staff were appropriately employed.

The provider had an effective complaints system available.

We visited the office and spoke with the area manager, the registered manager and two service managers about the running of the agency. In addition, seven support workers came to the office to meet with us so that we could talk to them about working for Home Farm Trust (HFT) domiciliary care agency.

Staff spoken with said that HFT was a very good agency to work for. They told us that they received good support and training so that they could do their jobs well. Staff told us that they were always given information about people prior to providing support. Staff told us that they felt proud to work for HFT, and proud of the quality of care provided.

Five people that received support from HFT were supported by staff to visit the office so that we could speak with them about their experiences of the support they received.

We were able to observe the interactions between staff and people supported by HFT, and speak with three of the five people who visited the office. All of the people spoken with said that they were happy with the support they received. They told us that they knew their support workers and they were provided with support in the way they wanted and preferred. People said that they felt safe with support staff. Comments included; “They (support staff) are very good. They know me exactly, and know what I like.” “They are good. They help me.” “I am happy. I do what I want.” “I decide what to do and they (the support staff) help.” People spoken with confirmed that staff talked to them about the support they needed.

HF Trust - Sheffield & Derbyshire DCA is a domiciliary care agency registered to provide personal care. The agency office is based in the S8 area of Sheffield. Support is provided to younger adults living in their own homes throughout Sheffield and Derbyshire. Support can range from a few hours each week based around provision of activities, to twenty four hour support with all aspects of personal care and daily living. At the time of this inspection 57 people were supported by the agency.

In addition to supporting people in individual accommodation, the service supported people with their own tenancies in eleven shared living accommodations. Each of the shared living locations had a service manager.

There was a registered manager at the service who was registered with CQC. 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 and associated regulations about how the service is run.

Our last inspection at HF Trust - Sheffield & Derbyshire DCA took place on 2 December 2013. The service was found to be meeting the requirements of the regulations we inspected at that time.

This inspection took place on 28 and 29 September 2015 and short notice was given. We told the registered manager 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 the registered manager would be available.

People supported and their representatives spoken with made positive comments about HF Trust - Sheffield & Derbyshire DCA. People said “I am happy” and “I like it a lot, I like the staff.” People who we were unable to verbally communicate with were able to communicate with their key workers and had a good rapport with them.

One relative spoken with commented, “I have peace of mind now, it is better than I dreamed of.”

We found systems were in place to make sure people received their medicines safely.

Staff recruitment procedures were thorough and ensured people’s safety was promoted.

Staff were provided with relevant induction and training to make sure they had the right skills and knowledge for their role. Staff understood their role and what was expected of them. They were happy in their work, motivated and proud to work at the service. Staff were confident in the way the service was managed. The service followed the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) Code of practice and the principles of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). This helped to protect the rights of people who may not be able to make important decisions themselves.

The support provided was person centred and flexible to suit the needs of the person supported.

People supported and a relative spoken with said they could speak with staff if they had any worries or concerns and they would be listened to.

There were effective systems in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service provided. Regular checks and audits were undertaken to make sure full and safe procedures were adhered to. People using the service and their relatives had been asked their opinion via surveys, the results of these had been audited to identify any areas for improvement.