Background to this inspection
Updated
17 July 2019
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:
The inspection of this small service 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. It provides a service to older adults, and younger disabled adults. At the time of our inspection, there were 33 people using the service.
The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.
Notice of inspection:
We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection visit because it is small and we needed to be sure that someone would be available to provide the information we needed for our inspection.
Inspection site visit activity started and ended on 10 May 2019. We visited the office location to see the registered manager/provider and office staff and to review care records and policies and procedures.
What we did before the inspection:
We reviewed any notifications we had received from the service. A notification is information about important events which the service is required to tell us about by law. We sought feedback from the local authority and professionals who work with the service.
We used the information the provider sent us in the provider information return. This is information providers are required to send us with key information about their service, what they do well, and improvements they plan to make. This information helps support our inspections. We also reviewed any information about the service that we had received from members of the public and external agencies.
We used all of this information to plan our inspection.
During the inspection we looked at records relating to four people’s care, three staff recruitment records, training records and complaints. We also looked at audits and systems in place to check on the quality of service provided. We spoke with the registered manager, both company directors, and one care staff. We went to visit four people in their own homes and spoke with one person’s relative.
After the inspection we continued to seek clarification from the provider to validate evidence found. We looked at training data and quality assurance records. We also spoke with three care staff members by telephone.
Updated
17 July 2019
About the service: Clark James HomeCare - Norwich is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats. It provides a service to older adults, and younger disabled adults. At the time of this inspection the service supported 33 people with their personal care. Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also consider any wider social care provided.
People’s experience of using this service:
People who used the service and relatives were positive about the service provided. One person told us, “I get all the help I need, [the staff] are caring and kind.” One person’s relative said, “This service is brilliant, I haven’t had any reason to complain. [The staff] know [my relative] so well and they get on so well with everyone.”
Staff supported people to keep safe and acted when necessary to prevent any harm or abuse. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives, risks to people’s health and wellbeing were managed in a way that did not restrict them unnecessarily. People were supported by staff who were skilled, highly motivated and caring.
People were supported to have their medicines as they prescribed. If needed, people were helped to eat and drink enough to maintain a healthy diet. Staff protected people from the risk of infection by using the necessary protection, such as gloves and aprons.
Care plans were person centred and people were consulted over their care needs and actively encouraged to make their own decisions. Staff were responsive in identifying and reviewing changes to support good physical and mental health.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service confirmed this practice.
Staff received the training and support they needed to carry out their roles. The service worked to ensure that people received person centred care when they used and were supported by different services.
Staff who spoke with us talked about the people who use the service in a caring and positive way. The people who used the service told us that staff were kind, caring and protected their privacy and dignity. We saw evidence that people were able to express their views and staff listened to what they said and took action to ensure their decisions were acted on.
People received care that was personalised and responsive to their needs. The service listened to people’s experiences, concerns and complaints. They took steps to investigate complaints and to make any changes needed.
The service was well led, the registered manager was knowledgeable and well informed. Quality assurance systems were in place and were robust in all areas.
Rating at last inspection: The service was rated as Requires Improvement at its last inspection. (Published on 9 June 2018) This was because although there were quality assurance systems in place, these were not fully effective and further improvements were needed to monitor medicines administration. We also found that further monitoring was needed of the care plans in terms of ensuring that they contained staff guidance in relation to people's health conditions. The regular quality assurance systems had not been robust enough to identify these shortcomings in the care planning documents.
Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk