Background to this inspection
Updated
15 June 2016
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 took place on the 25 May 2016 and was announced. The provider was given 48 hour’s notice because the location provides a domiciliary care service. We wanted to be sure that someone would be in the office to speak with us. The inspection team consisted of one inspector.
The provider had completed 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.
Before the inspection we checked the information that we held about the service and the service provider. This included statutory notifications sent to us by the registered manager about incidents and events that had occurred at the service. A notification is information about important events which the service is required to send us by law. We used all this information to decide which areas to focus on during our inspection.
During our inspection we spoke with nine people and five relatives who use the service over the telephone, four care staff, two community team managers and the registered manager. We observed staff working in the office dealing with issues and speaking with people and staff over the telephone.
We reviewed a range of records about people’s care and how the service was managed. These included the care records for seven people, medicine administration records (MAR), six staff training records, support and employment records, quality assurance audits, incident reports and records relating to the management of the service.
We spoke with two health care professionals after the inspection to gain their views of the service.
The service was last inspected on 6 November 2013 with no concerns.
Updated
15 June 2016
The inspection took place on the 25 May 2016 and was announced. The provider was given 48 hour’s notice because the location provides a domiciliary care service. We wanted to be sure that someone would be in to speak with us.
Handcross provides domiciliary care and support for people in their own home. The service provides personal care, help, and support to people with a variety of needs. This included older people, people living with dementia and people with a physical disability. At the time of our inspection 53 people were receiving a care service with an age range of 22 to 101.
The service had 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.
The experiences of people were positive. People told us they felt safe, that staff were kind and the care they received was good. One person told us “I feel very safe with everyone that comes to see me”. A relative told us “It’s a very safe service, no issues there”.
There were good systems and processes in place to keep people safe. Assessments of risk had been undertaken and there were clear instructions for staff on what action to take in order to mitigate them. Staff knew how to recognise the potential signs of abuse and what action to take to keep people safe. The registered manager made sure there was enough staff at all times to meet people’s needs. When the provider employed new staff at the service they followed safe recruitment practices.
The provider had arrangements in place for the safe administration of medicines. People were supported to receive their medicine when they needed it. People were supported to maintain good health and had assistance to access health care services when needed.
The service considered people’s capacity using the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) as guidance. People’s capacity to make decisions had been assessed. Staff observed the key principles in their day to day work checking with people that they were happy for them to undertake care tasks before they proceeded.
Staff felt fully supported by the registered manager to undertake their roles. They were given training updates, supervision and development opportunities. For example staff were offered to undertake additional training and development courses to increase their understanding of the needs of people using the service. One member of staff told us “We have excellent training and updates and can ask for more if we need it”.
People and relatives told us that staff were kind and caring. Comments included “They are caring and so kind and help me with what I need” and “They are all caring and always happy, it’s lovely”.
People confirmed staff respected their privacy and dignity. Staff had a firm understanding of respecting people within their own home and providing them with choice and control. People were supported at mealtimes to access food and drink of their choice and were supported to undertake activities away from their home.
People’s needs were assessed and regularly reviewed and they received care based upon their needs and preferences. Staff were proactive in recognising and supporting changes in people’s needs. We found the care plans to be person centred and details recorded were consistent.
People and relatives said they were happy with the management of the service. People’s comments included “The manager is lovely, we can call her anytime” and “The manager is good, helps out if needed and will check all is ok”. There were clear lines of accountability. The service had good leadership and direction from the registered manager. One member of staff told us “We have a good manager, who is approachable and supportive”.
The registered manager monitored the quality of the service by the use of regular checks and internal quality audits to drive improvements. Feedback was sought by the registered manager through surveys which were sent to people and their relatives. Survey results were positive and any issues identified acted upon. People and relatives we spoke with were aware of how to make a complaint and felt they would have no problem raising any issues.