Updated 25 March 2020
The inspection
We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.
Inspection team
This inspection was carried out by one inspector.
Service and service type
This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats.
The service did not have a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. However, arrangements were in place to manage the service.
Notice of inspection
We gave the service prior notice of the inspection. This was because it is a small service and we needed to be sure that the provider or registered manager would be in the office to support the inspection.
Inspection activity started and ended 28 January 2020 when we visited the office location.
What we did before the inspection
We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. We used all of this information to plan our inspection.
The provider was not asked to complete a provider information return prior to this inspection. This is information we require providers to send us to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We took this into account when we inspected the service and made the judgements in this report.
During the inspection
We spoke with the nominated individual (The nominated individual is responsible for supervising the management of the service on behalf of the provider), the care manager, one of the directors and a member of care staff. We reviewed a range of records. This included three people’s care records and medication records. We looked at three staff files in relation to recruitment and staff supervision. A variety of records relating to the management of the service, including policies and procedures were reviewed.
After the inspection
We spoke with one person who used the service, two relatives, one member of staff and a training assessor on the telephone. We also received feedback via email from a relative and a social care professional. We continued to seek clarification from the provider to validate evidence found. We looked at training data and quality assurance records.