Background to this inspection
Updated
5 February 2020
The inspection
We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.
Inspection team
The inspection was carried out by one inspector and an Expert by Experience undertook telephone interviews with people who used the service and relatives. An Expert by Experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.
Service and service type
This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats.
The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.
Notice of inspection
We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection. This was because we needed to be sure that the registered manager would be in the office to support the inspection.
Inspection activity started on 13 January 2020 and ended on 14 January 2020. We visited the office location on 14 January 2020.
What we did before the inspection
We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. We sought feedback from the local authority and professionals who work with the service. The provider completed a provider information return prior to this inspection. This is information we require providers to send us to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We took this into account when we inspected the service and made the judgements in this report. We used all of this information to plan our inspection.
During the inspection
We spoke with nine people who used the service and three relatives of other people about their experience of the care provided. We received written feedback about the service from six care workers, met the office team and spoke with the director of operations, the registered manager, care manager, a senior care worker and a care worker.
We reviewed a range of records. This included 10 people’s care records and multiple medication records. We looked at six staff files in relation to recruitment and staff supervision. A variety of records relating to the management of the service, including policies and procedures were reviewed.
After the inspection
We continued to seek clarification from the provider to validate evidence found. We looked at training data and quality assurance records. We contacted three external professionals and received a reply from one.
Updated
5 February 2020
About the service
Westminster Homecare Limited (West London) is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to mostly older people living in their own homes. It also supports some adults who are living with dementia and adults who have physical or learning disabilities. At the time of our inspection the service was providing care to 108 people.
Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also consider any wider social care provided.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People told us they felt safe. Where there were risks to people’s safety and wellbeing, these had been assessed and the provider had done all that was reasonably practicable to lessen those risks. People received their medicines safely and as prescribed.
People's care and risk management plans set out the care tasks they required help with and these contained personalised information about people and their preferences for how they liked to be supported.
There were robust systems in place to monitor the quality of the service and recognise when improvements were required. The provider was transparent and there was clear communication within the team, so they learnt from mistakes and made improvements when things went wrong.
We received positive feedback from people and their relatives about using the service. People said staff were caring and treated them with dignity and respect.
The provider made sure there were enough staff to support people and staff usually arrived on time at people’s homes. The provider’s monitoring system helped ensure people received all their visits as planned. Staff received induction, training and supervision and felt supported in their roles.
The provider sought feedback from people, relatives and staff and used this to develop the service. People and staff were confident they could raise any concerns they had with the registered manager and felt they would be listened to.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
The registered manager and senior staff were responsive to and worked in partnership with other agencies to meet people’s needs.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection
The last rating for this service was requires improvement (published 22 January 2019). The provider completed an action plan after the last inspection to show what they would do and by when to improve. At this inspection we found improvements had been made.
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.