Background to this inspection
Updated
23 December 2016
We carried out this inspection visit 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.
This inspection visit took place on 5 December 2016 and was announced. The provider was given seven days’ notice because the location provides a domiciliary care service and we wanted to make sure staff were available to speak with us. The inspection was carried out by one 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 did not attend the office base of the service or visit people at home, but spoke by telephone with people and relatives of people who used the service
We checked the information we held about the service and the provider. This included notifications that the provider had sent to us about incidents at the service and information we had received from the public. We also spoke with the local authority who provided us with current monitoring information. We used this information to formulate our inspection plan.
On this occasion, we had not asked the provider to send us a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. However, we offered the provider the opportunity to share information they felt relevant with us.
We used a range of different methods to help us understand people’s experiences. We visited two people in their homes and one relative. We also made telephone calls to a further eight people and one relative.
We spoke with three care staff, one senior, one care coordinator, manager and the regional manager. We looked at care records for five people to see if their records were accurate and up to date. We also looked at records relating to the management of the service including quality checks
Updated
23 December 2016
We inspected this service on 5 December 2016. This was an announced inspection and we telephoned the week prior to our inspection in order to arrange home visits and telephone interviews with people. The service provides care in people’s homes to older people and people with debilitating illness and long term conditions such as dementia. The service is available in the Leicester city area. At the time of the inspection 180 people were being supported by the service.
The service did not have a registered manager. 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. However the provider had recruited a manager and their application with us was being processed.
Some people did not receive their care on time as staff had not been allocated sufficient travel time between calls. The out of hour’s system was not effective in responding to calls in a timely way when called by people of staff.
People felt supported by the service and received a positive response when they contacted the office. The provider used audits to consider any service improvements for both the people using the service and the staff. Staff told us they felt valued by the manager and that the company provided some positive incentives along with services to support their role.
People told us they felt safe with the support they received from the staff. There were arrangements in place to help safeguard people from the risk of abuse. Risk assessments had been completed to keep people safe and provide guidance to staff. There were arrangements in place for administering and the recording of medicines. Where people were supported with their meals, they were given choice and encouraged to maintain their independence.
There were sufficient staff to support people’s needs and the provider ensured the appropriate checks where completed when employing new staff. Positive, caring relationships had been developed with people. Staff respected people’s privacy and treated them with respect and dignity.
Staff and people told us that the training enabled the service to be provided safety. The training enabled staff to support people effectively and for staff to understand their roles. All staff had a good understanding of their responsibilities in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Records showed people were involved in making decisions about their care and support and their consent was sought and documented.
The provider had up to date complaints policies and we saw how any complaints had been responded to and addressed. We also observed a range of quality assurance systems which the provider used to monitor the quality of service people received. These audits supported the care that was planned and delivered along with ensuring safety to the people and staff.