Aspire PC Limited

Updated 4 July 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.

The visit to the agency office took place on 1 May 2018. The registered manager was given three days’ notice of our visit. We did this because the registered manager is sometimes out of the office and we needed to be sure that they would be available.

An adult social care inspector carried out the inspection.

Before our inspection, we reviewed the information we held about the service. This included the service’s inspection history and registration information. We also contacted commissioners of the service and Healthwatch. Healthwatch is an independent consumer champion that gathers and represents the views of the public about health and social care services in England. This information was reviewed and used to assist with our inspection.

The provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the registered provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

During the inspection, we reviewed the feedback received from a relative, two staff, the registered manager and nominated individual, and a director of the company. At the office visit we also spent time looking at records, which included the person’s care records, three staff records and other records relating to the management of the service, such as quality assurance.

Updated 4 July 2018

This inspection took place on 1 May 2018 and was announced.

The service was last inspected on 13 March 2017. The overall rating after that inspection was requires improvement. A requirement notice was issued for regulation 17 good governance. The governance systems required embedding to ensure regulations were met. Following the last inspection, we asked the registered provider to complete an action plan to show what they would do and by when. The service had made improvements so that this regulation was now met.

Aspire PC Limited is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care for people living in their own homes. Not everyone using Aspire PC Limited receives the regulated activity; CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also take into account any wider social care provided. At the time of the inspection, there was one younger adult who used the service for personal care.

There was a manager at the service who was registered with CQC. 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.

The leadership, management and staff were passionate about providing a person centred and caring culture. (Person centred means that care is tailored to meet the needs and aspirations of each person, as an individual.) The management team and staff shared the vision of the service. Staff were very committed to providing care that was centred on people's individual needs.

The relative of the person who used the service had confidence in the care delivered and told us their relative received good care and support. They told us their relative felt safe, the staff were caring, kind and respected their choices and decisions.

Care records for the person were detailed, reflected the needs of the person who used the service and had been reviewed. This included risks associated with the health, safety or wellbeing of the person.

The person who used the service was supported with their health and dietary needs, where this was part of their plan of care or in an emergency.

The person who used the service was supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

The relative of the person who used the service told us when they or their relative raised any issues with staff and managers, their concerns were listened to and acted upon.

Staff were familiar with the person’s individual needs and were able to describe how they maintained people’s privacy and dignity.

Staff told us they worked as part of a team. There was a regular team of care staff who knew the person they supported well. When staff were recruited, a system was in place so that the relevant information and documents were obtained. The service had systems and processes in place to provide training and supervision for staff so that they had the skills, knowledge and experience to deliver effective care and support.

Systems and processes were in place to protect people from abuse and avoidable harm, including the management of financial transactions.