Sentinel Homecare Limited

Updated 14 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 was planned to check 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 inspection was announced. We gave the service a few days’ notice of the inspection site visit. This was because we needed to make arrangements with the provider to speak to people who used the service prior to visiting the office location. The inspection took place between 20 and 28 June 2018. On 26 June 2018 we visited the provider’s office to review care records and policies and procedures. Between 20 June and 28 June 2018, we made phone calls to people who used the service and staff.

The inspection team consisted of two inspectors, an assistant inspector 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. The expert-by-experience had experience of homecare services.

Before the inspection we reviewed information available to us about this service. We used information the provider sent us in the Provider Information Return. This is information we require providers to send us at least once annually to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We also reviewed safeguarding alerts, ‘share your experience’ forms and notifications that had been sent to us. A notification is information about important events which the provider is required to send us by law. We also spoke with the local authority commissioning and safeguarding teams to gain their feedback about the service.

During the inspection we spoke with 17 people who used the service and one relative. We spoke with 10 care workers, two auditors who also worked as care workers, a care co-ordinator, the quality assurance manager, the deputy manager and the registered manager. We reviewed eight people’s care records and other records relating to the management of the service such as training records, rotas and audits.

Updated 14 July 2018

Sentinel homecare is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats in the community. It provides a service to mainly older adults but also some younger disabled adults. At the time of the inspection, care and support was being delivered to 146 people.

The inspection took place between the 20 and 28 June 2018 and was announced.

At the last inspection in June 2017 we rated the provider as requires improvement. We had concluded that improvements had been made since the previous inspection in 2016 but some issues remained with the accuracy and completeness of documentation. We found one breach of regulation relating to good governance.

At this inspection we found further improvements had been made and the service was no longer in breach of any regulations. Feedback from people about the quality of the service was good. The service was committed to continuous improvement of the service and took feedback and complaints seriously. Because of this we rated the service good across all domains.

A registered manager was in place. 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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People told us they felt safe and secure using the service. Safeguarding issues were taken seriously by the service and appropriately reported and acted on. Risks to people’s health and safety were assessed and mitigated.

There were enough staff deployed to ensure people received a timely and consistent service. People said staff usually arrived on time and did not miss calls. Staff were recruited safely to help ensure they were suitable to work with vulnerable people.

Overall medicines were managed safely. Clear records were maintained of the support people were provided with. Some medicine care plans needed updating to ensure they reflected people’s current support needs.

Staff received a range of appropriate training relevant to their role. Support mechanisms were in place which included regular supervision and appraisal. Improvements had been made to staff rotas to ensure people received a higher level of continuity with regards to care workers.

People’s nutritional needs were assessed and plans of care put in place to meet those needs.

The service was compliant with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). People’s consent was sought before care and support was delivered.

People’s care needs were assessed and plans of care put in place for staff to follow. The service worked with external health professionals to help meet people’s needs.

People said staff treated them with kindness and compassion. People said they usually received care from the same care workers who they had become familiar with.

The service planned care and support around maintaining and promoting people’s independence.

People’s views and opinions were regularly sought by the service and used to make improvements to the service. These included taking complaints and comments seriously and using them to improve working practices.

The service had a comprehensive governance framework in place which included regular auditing and checking of how the service was operating. Findings from audits and checks were used to make further improvements to the service.

The service accessed best practice guidance to inform policies and procedures and help ensure a consistent and high standard quality of care.