# Personal Assistant Service South

*Operated by Independence Matters C.I.C..*

Personal Assistant Service South is a CQC-regulated home-care agency in Attleborough.

## CQC Ratings

| Key question | Rating |
| --- | --- |
| Overall | Good |
| Safe | Good |
| Effective | Good |
| Caring | Good |
| Responsive | Good |
| Well-led | Good |

Rating published: 11/06/2019

## Practical info

- Postcode: NR17 2AT
- Registered manager: Siely, Belinda
- Local authority: Norfolk
- Region: East
- City: Attleborough
- Last CQC check: 11/Jun/2019 - 00:00

## Inspection findings

### Other

- Finding
  - Evidence: Transparent, democratic leadership culture with 360-degree staff feedback and whistleblowing policy
  - Published: 2020-01-29
- Finding
  - Evidence: Effective quality assurance systems including announced and unannounced spot checks and care plan audits
  - Published: 2020-01-29
- Finding
  - Evidence: Complaints procedure in place with all complaints resolved to complainants' satisfaction
  - Published: 2020-01-29
- Finding
  - Evidence: People supported to engage in social, recreational, and work-related activities promoting independence
  - Published: 2020-01-29
- Finding
  - Evidence: Strong person-centred culture with staff matched to individuals to promote caring relationships
  - Published: 2020-01-29
- Finding
  - Evidence: People's nutritional and healthcare needs proactively met in partnership with health professionals
  - Published: 2020-01-29
- Finding
  - Evidence: Staff well-trained and supported through induction, supervision, and appraisal
  - Published: 2020-01-29
- Finding
  - Evidence: Medicines safely managed with staff trained and competency-assessed
  - Published: 2020-01-29
- Finding
  - Evidence: Sufficient staffing levels with a relief bank ensuring continuity of care
  - Published: 2020-01-29
- Finding
  - Evidence: Thorough values-based recruitment process including DBS checks, references, and pre-interview observation
  - Published: 2020-01-29
- Finding
  - Evidence: People were kept safe with robust safeguarding knowledge among staff and management
  - Published: 2020-01-29
- **consent_capacity** _(moderate)_
  - Evidence: there was no provider assessment in place to assess people's capacity to make informed decisions about their day-to-day care.
  - Published: 2020-01-29
- **consent_capacity** _(moderate)_
  - Evidence: there was no policy guidance or written procedures in place to guide staff in the application of the MCA, which includes a 'best interest' approach.
  - Published: 2020-01-29
- Finding
  - Evidence: The registered manager worked with key stakeholders and participated in regional meetings to share best practice
  - Published: 2019-06-11
- Finding
  - Evidence: Questionnaires and surveys were completed annually with staff, people using the service and professionals
  - Published: 2019-06-11
- Finding
  - Evidence: Alternative communication methods (iPad, Makaton, PEG boards) were used to support people to express their views
  - Published: 2019-06-11
- Finding
  - Evidence: The service had a dignity champion and a dignity charter centred on the person supported
  - Published: 2019-06-11
- Finding
  - Evidence: Hospital passports were in place for each person to ensure safety during hospital admissions
  - Published: 2019-06-11
- Finding
  - Evidence: People were involved in developing and reviewing their care plans and views were incorporated into support delivery
  - Published: 2019-06-11
- Finding
  - Evidence: Staff received comprehensive induction, regular training, supervision and annual appraisals
  - Published: 2019-06-11
- Finding
  - Evidence: Staff received training in administering medicines and competency was checked; MAR records were audited
  - Published: 2019-06-11
- Finding
  - Evidence: Risk assessments were routinely completed and updated when people's circumstances changed
  - Published: 2019-06-11
- Finding
  - Evidence: Staff had a good understanding of safeguarding procedures and concerns were escalated effectively
  - Published: 2019-06-11
- **governance** _(moderate)_
  - Evidence: analysis was not undertaken on the themes and trends across all accidents and incidents. This did not allow the registered manager to address potentially larger and more complex concerns
  - Published: 2019-06-11
- **incident_learning** _(moderate)_
  - Evidence: analysis did not allow for the identification of themes and trends upon which action could be taken
  - Published: 2019-06-11

## Source

Data published by the [Care Quality Commission](https://www.cqc.org.uk/) under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Canonical page: https://homecarecompass.co.uk/agency/1-1047798914

HomeCare Compass is an independent guide and is not affiliated with the CQC.