Primary Homecare Limited

Updated 4 January 2023

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 Health and Social Care Act 2008.

Inspection team

The inspection team consisted of an inspector and two Expert by Experiences. An Expert by Experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

Service and service type

This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats. This service is required to have a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. This meant they and the provider were legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

At the time of this inspection there was not a registered manager in post, but they had applied to CQC to become registered and subsequently approved. Both the director and operational manager were involved with the day to day running of the service.

Notice of inspection

This inspection was announced. We gave the service short notice of the inspection. This was because we requested data and information before our site visit to analyse prior and explore on the day.

Inspection activity started on 6 July 2022 when we gave notice and requested data. The site visit was completed on 12 July 2022. Telephone calls were made offsite to people who used the service and relatives on 14 and 18 July 2022. We had meeting via Teams with the management team on 25 July 2022 when we gave feedback.

What we did before the inspection

We reviewed our systems and information we held about the service. We used the information the provider sent us in the provider information return (PIR). This is information providers are required to send us annually with key information about their service, what they do well, and improvements they plan to make. We took this into account when we inspected the service and made judgements in this report.

During the inspection

We spoke with 24 people and relatives in total (11 people and 13 relatives) about their experience of Primary Homecare.

We spoke with the provider and operational manager and a care co-ordinator. We received electronic feedback from 13 members of staff and three health and social care professionals who work closely with the service.

We reviewed a range of records for six people, which included risk assessments, care planning, daily notes, medication records, safeguarding investigations, complaint outcomes. We examined records relating to four staff. We also viewed some of the provider’s policies and procedures, training data, quality assurance records, management monitoring and oversight records.

Updated 4 January 2023

Primary Homecare Limited is a domiciliary care service providing care to people in their own homes. CQC only inspects where people receive a regulated activity of personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating.

Where they do receive personal care, we also consider any wider social care provided. At the time of inspection there were 99 people who used the service who received personal care. This agency also offers a rehabilitation service to people.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

Primary Homecare Limited provides an exceptionally caring and responsive service. People and their relatives were extremely complimentary about their experience and would recommend the service to others. One person said, “They do so much so well. They’re efficient and very professional in what they do and they genuinely like to care.” One relative told us, “Oh God, yes I’d recommend them. It’s a godsend for us. [My family member] seems a lot happier.”

There were several special examples of where staff had gone the extra mile to ensure people received a tailor-made service. People’s life choices were respected including staff protecting people from being discriminated against, appreciating and championing diversity and ensuring people's privacy and dignity are central to their care. People told us their care workers were exceptionally caring and respectful. People were enabled to lead their best lives, as independently as possible on their terms.

The management team and staff worked in partnership with people, relatives and other professionals to achieve person-centred care and excellent outcomes for people. One professional said, “I have several customers that are supported by primary home care who are flexible and responsive to the customers’ needs and expectations". People said that they had a small group of staff that knew them, their situation and their support networks well. People received their care visits at the times they expected and for the length of time agreed.

People felt safe and trusted the staff that supported them, because staff were well trained and respectful. One person said, “They speak to me so nicely and listen to everything.”

Risks to people had been assessed and were managed safely. People's care records were re-assessed regularly and guided staff on how to assist people safely and encourage their independence.

Staff felt supported and valued in their role by the management team and there were enough staff appropriately recruited and employed to meet people’s needs.

People received their medication as prescribed and staff adhered to infection prevention and control procedures in line with legislative requirements and recognised best practice guidelines.

People's communication needs were detailed in their care plans. Care plans also detailed people's preferences of support, for example, gender of staff or preference of language if not English. Staff understood equality and diversity and ensured people's privacy and dignity was respected.

Staff understood the importance of gaining consent from people. 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 supported this practice.

People and relatives felt able to raise any issues with the staff and management team and were confident these would be addressed.

Systems to monitor the quality and safety of the service were in place. Care records were on an electronic system that had many functions and led to better management oversight and monitoring of service delivery. The provider was committed to providing high quality care and the service worked well in partnership with others to ensure the best outcomes for people.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection

Rating at the last inspection was outstanding. (Published 17 September 2019)

Why we inspected

This inspection was prompted by a review of the information we held about this service.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service , which will help inform when we next inspect.