MiHomecare Islington

Updated 14 May 2020

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 team consisted of one inspector and two 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

MiHomecare is a 'domiciliary care service' where people receive care and support in their own homes. Therefore, the CQC only regulates the care provided to people and not the premises they live in.

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

This inspection was unannounced.

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.

What we did before the inspection

We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. 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 used all of this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection

We spoke with 23 people who used the service and 19 relatives about their experience of the care provided. We spoke with 12 members of staff, including the operations director and the registered manager.

We reviewed a range of records. This included 15 people’s care records and multiple medication records. We looked at 12 staff files in relation to recruitment and staff supervision. A variety of records relating to the management of the service, including policies and procedures were reviewed.

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 spoke with two professionals who regularly visited the service.

Updated 14 May 2020

About the service

MiHomecare is a domiciliary care service which provides personal care and support to people in their own homes. At the time of the inspection there were 570 people using the service. People using the service lived within the London Boroughs of Islington (515 people) and Tower Hamlets (55 people) and had their service commissioned by the local authorities.

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

People’s experience of the service was positive. A relative of one person using the service told us, “My relative feels absolutely safe with the carers.” This view of the service was repeated by everyone we spoke with.

People who used the service were protected from the risk of harm and abuse. There was a safeguarding system and care workers knew how to identify and report concerns. Where safeguarding concerns had been identified, the registered manager had taken appropriate action.

There were effective systems and processes in place to minimise risks to people. Risks had been identified, assessed and reviewed. The assessments provided information about how to support people to ensure risks were reduced.

Care workers had been recruited safely. Pre-employment checks had been carried out to help the service make safer recruitment decisions and prevent the appointment of unsuitable people. This meant only suitable applicants were offered work with the service.

There were enough care workers deployed to keep people safe. People told us care workers were always on time and stayed for the allotted time.

There were systems in place to ensure proper and safe use of medicines. People’s relatives told us people received their medicines on time.

People were protected from the risks associated with poor infection control. Care workers were supplied with appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE), including gloves and aprons

There was a process in place to report, monitor and learn from accidents and incidents. Accidents were documented timely in line with the service’s policy and guidance.

There was an effective training system in place. Care workers demonstrated good knowledge and skills necessary for their role. They received regular supervision and annual appraisal, including monthly spot checks to monitor their performance when supporting people.

People’s health needs were met. Their care was co-ordinated with a range of health and social care professionals to ensure people’s health were met.

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 told us staff were kind and caring and treated them with dignity and respect. They felt that care workers treated them fairly, regardless of age, gender or disability.

People received person centred care. Their assessments showed they had been involved in the assessment process. Care workers were knowledgeable about people’s needs. They could describe to us how people liked to be supported.

The service had a range of quality assurance processes, which included, annual surveys, regular unannounced spot checks and telephone calls, audits and a complaints system. This was used to drive improvements. People told us they were asked of their views about the quality of the service.

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)

This service was registered with us on 9 January 2019 and this is the first inspection.

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on our timelines for inspecting newly registered services.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.