Archived: Network Health and Social Care Harrow

The service had a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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. The registered manager was on duty on the day of our inspection and we also met with the branch manager of the domiciliary care agency.

There were procedures in place for monitoring and managing risks to people. People told us they felt safe with the support they received from care staff. There were arrangements in place to help safeguard people from the risk of abuse.

Risks to people were assessed and well managed, People had risk assessments and risk management plans to reduce the likelihood of harm. The risk assessments identified the risks and the actions required of staff to minimise the risk.

People were protected from the recruitment of unsuitable staff. Recruitment records contained the relevant checks.

Staff had the skills, knowledge and experience to deliver effective care. Staff had received training in relevant areas of their work.

People said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and they were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment.

Staff understood their responsibilities in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005. People were involved in making decisions about their care and support and their consent was sought and documented.

People were supported to eat and drink sufficiently to maintain a balanced diet.

The service encouraged people to raise any concerns they had and responded to them in a timely manner.

There was a clear leadership structure and staff felt supported by management. The practice proactively sought feedback from staff and patients, which it acted on.

There were systems in place to continually monitor the quality of the service and people were asked for their opinions and action plans were developed where required to address areas for improvements.

During the inspection the service was supporting one person. We used a number of different methods to help us understand the experiences of the person using the service, because the person using the service had complex needs which meant they were not able to tell us their experiences. We spoke with a relative of the person receiving care, six care staff and read the plans of care of the person receiving care.

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary describes what the person using the service, their relatives and staff told us and the records we looked at.

If you want to see evidence that supports our summary please read the full report.

This is a summary of what we found:

Is the service safe?

Care was planned and delivered in a way that ensured people were safe. Care records contained risk assessments which provided guidance to staff on action to take to keep people safe. Health and safety checks and audits had been carried out to reduce any risk to people. Safeguarding procedures were in place. Staff had been provided with safeguarding training and were aware of action to take in response to safeguarding incidents or allegations.

Is the service effective?

Feedback from a relative and evidence from the person's care records indicated that the service was effective and responsive to the needs of this person. This person's care needs had been fully assessed with the help of their relative. This person's likes and dislikes were documented and staff we spoke with were aware of these. Their likes and dislikes were documented and staff we spoke with were aware of these. Care plans had been prepared and these were up to date and had been regularly reviewed.

Is the service caring?

Feedback from a relative indicated that staff were caring. The relative told us that staff were caring and that their relative was well looked after. The person's preferences, interests, and aspirations had been recorded and a relative confirmed care and support had been provided in accordance with their wishes.

Is the service responsive?

Feedback from a relative, staff and the manager indicated that the service was responsive to the needs of people. For example, arrangements for medication administration had been tailored to the needs of the person. Support was increased or reduced according to the person's needs at the time. The manager told us how the service had responded positively to a request to increase support when the main carer was away. A relative told us that the service had also responded positively in ensuring that they got the same staff to support their relative.

Is the service well-led?

The home had a registered manager who was knowledgeable regarding her role and responsibilities. There were arrangements for monitoring the quality of care provided. Regular audits on health and safety and other aspects of care were carried out. The provider conducted telephone monitoring and spot checks.