• Services in your home
  • Homecare service

Archived: Allied Healthcare Cambridge

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

First Floor, 9a The Pavement, St Ives, Cambridgeshire, PE27 5AD (01480) 464445

Provided and run by:
Nestor Primecare Services Limited

All Inspections

6 April 2016

During a routine inspection

This inspection took place on 6 and 7 April 2016 and was announced. We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of our inspection. This was because management and staff could be out. We wanted to make sure they were in. This was the first inspection of this service with this provider.

Allied Healthcare Cambridge is a domiciliary care and supported living service that is registered to provide personal care to people living in their own homes. At the time of our inspection there were 89 people using the service. Some people also used the supported living service. In supported living services, people live in their own home usually under a tenancy or licence agreement. They often receive personal care and/or social support in order to promote their independence.

The service had a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

Staff recruitment was undertaken to help ensure all staff were recruited in a safe way. Only those staff who were deemed suitable to work with people using the service were offered employment. People’s assessed care needs were met by suitably trained and qualified staff in a timely manner.

Medicines administration was completed by staff whose role required this. Their competency to do this safely was regularly assessed. Safe medicines administration and management practice was adhered to.

Staff’s knowledge and understanding of safeguarding procedures helped ensure that any suspected incident of harm would be acted upon and reported to the appropriate authorities. including their manager, the local safe guarding authority or the Care Quality Commission.

The registered manager was aware of the process to be followed should any person have a need to be lawfully deprived of their liberty. They and staff were knowledgeable about the situations where an assessment of people’s mental capacity was required. The service was working within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. No person using the service had been deemed to lack mental capacity to make some or all decisions about their care.

People’s privacy and dignity was respected by staff who knew people’s needs, and their levels of independence, well. People were supported to take risks in a safe way. Appropriate risk management strategies and records were in place for subjects such as falls, supporting people out in the community and medicines administration. Checks were completed to help ensure that people’s homes were a safe place for staff to work in.

People’s needs were assessed by staff using a formal process and information from the local authority which helped ensure that the service was able to safely meet these needs People were involved in this process in defining and agreeing their care needs.

People were supported to see or be seen by a range of health care professionals including a dietician, their GP or a community nurse.

Sufficient quantities of people’s preferred food and drinks were made available. People were supported with their independence to live in their own home as long as they wanted to.

Staff were provided with regular support, mentoring and training for their roles. This was through an effective programme of induction, meetings, coaching, supervision and yearly appraisals.

People were provided with information, guidance and support on how to report any concerns, compliments or suggestions for improvement. The provider took appropriate action to ensure any complaints were addressed to the complainant’s satisfaction.

A range of effective audit and quality assurance procedures were in place. The provider had processes in place to help ensure that the CQC is notified about events that they are required, by law, to do so.