Archived: MiHomecare - Wisbech

Updated 14 May 2015

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the registered manager 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.

This unannounced inspection took place on 01 and 02 April 2015 and was completed by two inspectors.

Before our inspection we looked at information we held about the service including statutory notifications. A notification is information about important events which the registered manager is required to tell us about by law. We also spoke with, and received information from, the service’s commissioners and the local safeguarding authority.

During the inspection we visited and spoke with five people in their home and we also spoke with five other people and two relatives by telephone. We also spoke with the registered manager, five care staff including team leaders and supervisors.

We looked at 10 people’s care and medicine administration records. We looked at records in relation to the management of the service such as meeting minutes and staff visit rosters. We also looked at staff recruitment, supervision and appraisal processes and training records, complaints and quality assurance records.

Updated 14 May 2015

MiHomecare - Wisbech is registered to provide personal care for people who live at home in and around the town of Wisbech. Its main office is located in the town centre and has accessible premises and parking for people living with a disability. The agency provides personal care for approximately 100 people.

This unannounced inspection took place on 01 and 02 April 2015.

At our previous inspection on 29 May 2014 the service was not meeting one of the regulations that we assessed. This was in relation to the management of people’s medicines. The provider sent us an action plan telling us that they would make the necessary improvements by 06 July 2014. At this inspection of 01 April 2015 we found that the necessary improvements had been made.

The service had a registered manager in post. They had been in post since October 2014. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to manage the service. Like registered managers, 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.

The registered manager had a robust recruitment process in place. This helped ensure that only staff of the right calibre and with suitable qualifications were offered employment. There was a sufficient number of suitably qualified and experienced staff working at the service. New care staff were provided with an induction to the service and were supported through this.

Staff had been trained in medicines administration and safeguarding people from harm and were knowledgeable about how to ensure people’s safety. People were supported with their prescribed medicines by staff whose competency to safely administer these has been assessed regularly.

The CQC is required by law to monitor the operation of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and to report on what we find. We found that the registered manager and staff were knowledgeable about when a request through the Court of Protection for a DoLS would be required. We found that no applications to lawfully deprive people of their liberty were required but the registered manager and senior staff were aware of the action to take if this was required. People’s ability to make decisions based on their best interests had been clearly documented to demonstrate which decisions they could make.

People’s care was provided by staff who always respected their privacy and dignity. People’s care was provided with compassion and in a way which people really appreciated. People were informed if care staff were going to be delayed.

People’s care records were held securely, were up-to-date but contained limited information for staff to follow. This meant that people were at risk of receiving inappropriate care. People and where required, their relatives, were involved in the assessment and development of their care needs.

People were supported to access a range of health care professionals. This included their allocated GP and community nursing services. Risks to people’s health were assessed and promptly acted upon according to each person’s needs.

People were able eat their preferred drinks and meals. People were supported to eat soft or pureed diets where this had been deemed as being required by health care professionals. People were supported to ensure they had access to sufficient food and drinks.

People, relatives and staff were provided with information on how to make a complaint and staff knew how to respond to any reported concerns or suggestions. People were satisfied with the response they received. Action was taken to address people’s concerns and to reduce the risk of any potential recurrence.

The registered manager had effective quality assurance processes and procedures in place, such as audits, spot checks and supervision meetings with staff to improve, the quality of people’s support and care. People were supported to raise concerns or comment on the quality of their care.