Archived: Allied Healthcare Bristol

Updated 2 December 2014

The inspection team consisted of an 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 inspector visited the office of Allied Healthcare Bristol on 14 August 2014. Before visiting the office we checked the information that we held about the service. We looked at the notifications we had received from the service. Services use notifications to tell us about important events relating to the regulated activities they provide. Health and social care professionals were contacted in order to gain their views about the service.

We reviewed the Provider Information Return (PIR). The PIR was information given to us by the provider. This enabled us to ensure we were addressing potential areas of concern. This was the first inspection of Allied Healthcare Bristol. It was reported in the PIR that 128 people were using the service.

Following our visit to the office, the expert by experience spoke with 11 people about their experience of the service. This included speaking with people’s family members, as well as with the people themselves. We received feedback from another 14 people who had completed surveys that we sent to them. Two staff members also completed surveys. We met with nine staff members and with the registered manager during our visit to the Allied Healthcare Bristol office. Four people’s care records were looked at, together with other records relating to their care and the running of the service. These included staff employment records, audits, and quality assurance reports.

This report was written during the testing phase of our new approach to regulating adult social care services. After this testing phase, inspection of consent to care and treatment, restraint, and practice under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) was moved from the key question ‘Is the service safe?’ to ‘Is the service effective?

The ratings for this location were awarded in October 2014. They can be directly compared with any other service we have rated since then, including in relation to consent, restraint, and the MCA under the ‘Effective’ section. Our written findings in relation to these topics, however, can be read in the ‘Is the service safe’ sections of this report.

Updated 2 December 2014

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. The inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and to pilot a new inspection process being introduced by CQC which looks at the overall quality of the service.

Allied Healthcare Bristol is a domiciliary care service providing personal care to people in their own homes. This was an announced inspection, which meant the provider knew we would be visiting. This was because we wanted to make sure the registered manager, or someone who could act on their behalf, would be available to support the inspection.

There was a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service and has the legal responsibility for meeting the requirements of the law, as does the provider.

People told us they felt safe when staff visited them to provide care. A thorough recruitment procedure was operated to ensure suitable staff would be employed. Staff received training in safeguarding adults and knew what to do if they had any concerns that someone was being abused.

People’s rights were protected when they lacked the mental capacity to make their own decisions. This was because staff understood their responsibilities in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

Action had been taken to reduce the risk of people being harmed when receiving care. This included assessing the use of equipment such as hoists to ensure it was safe when staff provided care to people in their own homes.

Staff received an induction and training so they were knowledgeable about people’s needs and competent when providing care. One person commented "Even the new ones are fine." Another person told us their care worker was "Helpful, friendly and knows exactly how I like the jobs carried out."

People received support with obtaining other services they needed in order to meet their health and care needs. This included making contact with health professionals such as the occupational therapist when people did not have the equipment they needed.

Staff were caring and had established good relationships with the people they cared for. People commented positively about the staff who visited them. Staff were described, for example, as "patient", "kind" and "caring". The feedback we received showed people and the care staff had been well matched, for example because there had been a shared interest in sport.

Staff stayed with people for the right amount of time and did the tasks expected of them. People felt the quality of care was good. However the arrival time of the staff was not always meeting people’s needs and expectations. This was being followed up in an action plan as part of the systems in place for assessing the quality of the service people received. These systems included gaining people’s views about the improvements they felt were needed.

The registered manager had identified a number of priorities for developing the service. This included establishing a staff team that worked well together. This was being achieved and staff told us they felt well supported in their work.