Archived: Belgravia Home Care

Updated 17 October 2017

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 was 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 took place on 26 September 2017 and was announced. The provider was given 48 hours’ notice of our visit because we wanted to ensure the manager was available to support the inspection process. Due to the small size of the service, one inspector carried out the inspection.

Before the inspection we reviewed records held by CQC which included notifications, complaints and any safeguarding concerns. A notification is information about important events which the registered person is required to send us by law. This enabled us to ensure we were addressing potential areas of concern at the inspection. Before the inspection the provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). The PIR 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.

During our inspection we visited the agency’s office and spoke with the manager and the care co-ordinator. We checked care records for two people, including their assessments, care plans and risk assessments. We looked at four staff files to check recruitment and training records. We checked surveys completed by people who used the service, the complaints log and records of accidents and incidents. We also checked quality monitoring audits and records of spot checks on staff.

We spoke with three people who used the service and three of their relatives to hear their views about the care and support provided. We received feedback about the service from one relative by email. We sent questionnaires to staff employed by the agency and received 13 responses. We also spoke with one member of staff by telephone.

This was the first inspection of this service since its registration with CQC.

Updated 17 October 2017

Belgravia Home Care provides care and support to people in their own homes. There were 11 people using the agency at the time of our inspection, eight of whom had live-in care workers.

The registered provider of the service is Care Your Way Limited.

The inspection took place on 26 September 2017 and was announced.

There was no registered manager in place at the time of our inspection. Like registered providers, registered managers are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act and associated Regulations about how the service is run. The manager had submitted an application for registration with the Care Quality Commission.

People felt safe when staff provided their care because their care workers understood their needs and any risks involved in their care. Relatives were confident their family members were safe when receiving their care and had confidence in the staff who supported them.

There were enough staff employed to meet all the agency’s care commitments. The agency had access to additional care staff to cover leave and sickness if necessary. There was a contingency plan in place to ensure people would continue to receive their care in the event of an emergency. Accidents and incidents were recorded and reviewed to identify any actions that could be implemented to prevent a recurrence.

People were protected by the provider’s recruitment procedures. The provider carried out checks to ensure they employed only suitable staff. Staff attended safeguarding training and understood their responsibilities in terms of recognising and reporting abuse. Where people’s care involved support with medicines, this was managed safely.

People received their care from regular staff who knew their needs well. Rotas were planned to ensure people received their care from a small team of familiar staff. Staff were introduced to people before they provided their care and people were informed if a replacement care worker would be visiting them because their regular care workers were unavailable.

Staff had access to the induction, training and support they needed to do their jobs. All staff had an induction when they started work, which included shadowing colleagues to observed how people preferred their care to be provided. Staff were supported through regular one-to-one supervision, which gave them an opportunity to discuss their training and development needs.

People’s care was provided in accordance with the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Staff had received training on the principles of the Act and how it applied in their work. People had recorded their consent to their care and said staff asked for consent before providing their care on a day-to-day basis. Capacity assessments had been carried out to determine whether people needed support to make decisions and relevant people were involved in best interests meetings where necessary.

People told us staff prepared meals they enjoyed and knew their likes and dislikes. Relatives said staff knew their family member’s preferences about the food they ate and any dietary restrictions. People’s dietary needs and preferences were discussed during their initial assessment. Any needs related to nutrition and hydration were recorded in people’s care plans. Staff attended training in nutrition and hydration in their induction and followed professional guidance where necessary to meet people’s needs.

Staff monitored people’s healthcare needs and responded appropriately if people became unwell. People told us their care workers supported them to maintain good health and liaised with healthcare professionals on their behalf if they wished. Relatives said staff were proactive in implementing measures to maintain good health, such as regular monitoring checks.

People were supported by kind and caring staff. People had developed positive relationships with their care workers and enjoyed their company. Relatives said staff treated their family members with respect and maintained their dignity when providing care. Staff supported people to maintain their independence and people were encouraged to be involved in planning their care. People’s religious and cultural needs were known and respected by staff.

People received a service that was responsive to their individual needs. Each person had an individual care plan drawn up from an initial assessment which provided detailed guidance for staff about their care. Care plans were reviewed regularly to ensure they continued to reflect people’s needs. The manager and care co-ordinator were proactive in identifying areas where outcomes for people could be improved and responded positively if concerns were raised. People and their relatives told us the manager had responded to any feedback they gave or changes they requested. There had been one complaint since the agency’s registration, which had been investigated and resolved.

The service was managed effectively, which meant people received well planned care. The manager and care co-ordinator worked closely together to ensure the agency functioned effectively. People and their relatives told us that communication with the manager and care co-ordinator was good. They said they had opportunities to give their views about their care and that their feedback was acted upon. Staff told us the manager and care co-ordinator provided good support and contacted them regularly to ensure they had the training, support and equipment they needed.

The manager and care co-ordinator had developed effective systems to monitor the quality of care people received. Staff practice was assessed through regular spot checks and any improvements needed were addressed. The manager and care co-ordinator audited key aspects of the service regularly, including care plans, risk assessments, medicines management and staff training. Records relating to people’s care were accurate, up to date and stored appropriately. Staff had received record-keeping training and records were monitored by the care co-ordinator to ensure they were maintained to an appropriate standard.