Background to this inspection
Updated
6 April 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 was conducted by 2 inspectors and an Expert by Experience. 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
The service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats.
Registered Manager
This provider is required to have a registered manager to oversee the delivery of regulated activities at this location. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Registered managers and providers are legally responsible for how the service is run, for the quality and safety of the care provided and compliance with regulations.
At the time of our inspection there was a registered manager in post.
Notice of inspection
This inspection was announced. We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection. This was because we needed to be sure that the provider or registered manager would be in the office to support the inspection.
Inspection activity started on 31 January 2023 and ended on 14 February 2023. We visited the location’s office/service on 31 January 2023.
What we did before the inspection
The provider was not asked to complete a Provider Information Return (PIR) prior to this inspection. A PIR is information providers send us to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We reviewed information we had about the service.
During the inspection
We spoke with 5 people using the service and 6 relatives. We spoke with 14 staff altogether,11 care staff, 1 field supervisor, 1 care coordinator, and the registered manager. We reviewed 20 people’s care records including risk assessments and 10 staff files in relation to recruitment. We also reviewed a range of management records including staff training, supervision, medicines, audits and complaints.
Updated
6 April 2023
About the service
J.C. Michael Groups Ltd is a domiciliary care agency providing personal care for people living in their own homes. At the time of our inspection there were 208 people using the service.
We expect health and social care providers to guarantee people with a learning disability and autistic people respect, equality, dignity, choices and independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ is the guidance CQC follows to make assessments and judgements about services supporting people with a learning disability and autistic people and providers must have regard to it.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
Right Support:
People were protected from harm as the provider had an effective safeguarding process in place. Staff understood how to ensure people were protected from the spread of infection. Medicines were managed safely. Staff were recruited safely.
The provider assessed people’s needs before the service began, which meant they could meet their care needs. People were involved in their care and could make decisions. Staff had training and regular support from the management team. People had their nutrition and hydration needs assessed. Staff worked with health care professionals to meet people’s needs. Staff asked people permission before providing care to them. 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.
Right Care:
People told us staff were kind and caring. People said they were treated with respect, however some people told us they did not always have the opportunity to give feedback. We spoke with the registered manager about this and they showed us a survey that had been sent out to everyone using the service to obtain their views. Staff told us they promoted people’s independence and protected people’s dignity.
People had care plans in place, people’s likes and preferences were recorded. People told us that staff communicated with them well. Records showed that people’s communication needs were recorded. People, staff and relatives told us they knew how to make a complaint. The provider had a complaints procedure in place.
Right Culture:
The provider had a call monitoring system in place, the data we analysed showed staff were often late on visits and in some cases did not stay for the allocated time. The provider had picked up on these issues through their auditing process and had taken steps to address them, however some of these issues were still not fully addressed.
There were mixed views about the communication from the office, some people said it was good and some said it was not good at all. The staff told us they felt supported by the management team. The provider had an auditing system in place which for the most part was effective. We have made a recommendation about the call and visit monitoring system. People told us overall they felt safe. Risk management plans were in place, we have made a recommendation about improving risk assessments.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection and update
The last rating for this service was requires improvement (published 18 November 2019) and there were breaches of regulation. The provider completed an action plan after the last inspection to show what they would do and by when to improve. At this inspection we found improvements had been made and the provider was no longer in breach of regulations.
At our last inspection we recommended that the provider considers current guidance to ensure care visits are delivered as per agreement. At this inspection we found some improvements had been made however we have recommended the provider make further improvements to address issues of staff lateness and visit times.
Why we inspected
The inspection was prompted by a review of the information we had about the service.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect. We will request an action plan from the provider to understand what they will do to improve the standards of quality and safety. We will work alongside the provider and local authority to monitor progress. We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.