Background to this inspection
Updated
5 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 checked 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.
This was an announced inspection and took place on 14 November 2017. 48 hours’ notice of the inspection was given because the service is a domiciliary care agency and the manager is often out of the office supporting staff or providing care. We needed to be sure that they would be in.
Before the inspection, the provider 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 also checked notifications made to us by the provider, safeguarding alerts raised regarding people living at the home and information we held on our database about the service and provider.
The inspection was carried out by one inspector.
There were 23 people receiving a personal care service and 39 staff. During the inspection, we contacted eight people or their relatives’ and five staff. We also spoke with four staff and the registered manager during the office visit.
We looked at three people’s care plans and four staff files. We also checked records, policies and procedures and maintenance and quality assurance systems.
Updated
5 January 2018
This was an announced inspection that took place on 14 November 2017.
The agency provides domiciliary, dementia and end of life care to people living in their own homes. It is located in the Hampton area.
There was a registered manager in post. 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.
This was the first inspection since the agency moved premises. At the previous inspection on 7 October 2015, the agency was rated overall good with good for each key question.
People and their relatives said that they were happy with the service that the agency provided. The agreed tasks were carried out on time and to their satisfaction. Normally they were given notice of any changes to staff and the timing of their care, unless it was unavoidable short notice. They felt safe with staff that the agency provided and thought that as an organisation the agency and its staff really cared about them. They said the service provided was safe, effective, caring, responsive and well led.
The records were up to date and covered all aspects of the care and support people received, the support choices they had made and identified that they were being met. They contained clearly recorded, fully completed, and regularly reviewed information that enabled staff to perform their duties well. The agency had incorporated new technology that improved the standard and quality of the service people received.
Staff were knowledgeable about the jobs they did, people they supported, the way people liked to be supported and worked well as a team. Staff had appropriate skills and provided care and support in a professional, friendly and kind way that was focussed on the individual as a person. Staff were aware of their responsibilities to treat people equally and respect their diversity and human rights. They treated everyone equally and fairly whilst recognizing and respecting people’s differences. Staff were well trained, knowledgeable and accessible to people and their relatives. Staff said the organisation was a good one to work for and they enjoyed their work. They had access to good training, support and there were opportunities for career advancement.
Staff encouraged people and their relatives to discuss health and other needs with them and passed on agreed information to GP’s and other community based health professionals, as required. Staff protected people from nutrition and hydration associated risks by giving advice about healthy food options and balanced diets whilst still making sure people’s likes, dislikes and preferences were met.
The agency staff were aware of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and their responsibilities regarding it.
They said the management team and organisation were approachable, responsive, encouraged feedback from them and consistently monitored and assessed the quality of the service provided.
The health care professionals that we contacted were happy with the support that the service provided for people.