Archived: GreenSquareAccord Warrington

Updated 28 September 2018

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection checked 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.

This inspection of Direct Health Warrington took place on the 30 and 31 July and 2 August 2018 and was ¿announced. In line with our current methodology for inspecting domiciliary care agencies this inspection was announced two working days prior to our visit to ensure the registered manager or other responsible person would be available to assist with the inspection.

The inspection team consisted of two adult social care inspectors 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 expert by experience telephoned people who used the service and their relatives to gain their views and opinions about the support being provided. One inspector telephoned staff who worked for the service to gather their feedback about the registered provider.

Before the inspection, we reviewed the information we held on the service. This included checking if we had received any ¿notifications. A notification is information about important events such as accidents or incidents, which the ¿provider is required to send to us by law. We also invited the local authority and stakeholders to provide us with any information they held about Direct Health Warrington. The provider 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. ¿

At the time of this inspection the registered manager confirmed 222 people were supported by the service and 83 people received personalised care.

We used a number of different methods to help us understand the experiences of people who used the service. We spoke with the registered manager, the quality support manager, seven support staff, six people receiving support from the service and eight relatives speaking on behalf of their family members. This gave us a wide insight into ¿their views across all areas of Direct Health Warrington.

We also reviewed a range of records about how the service was managed. These included, support records for three people to see if their records were accurate and reflected their ¿needs. We reviewed three staff recruitment files, staff duty rotas, monitoring audits, staff training and ¿supervision records, minutes of meetings, complaint and safeguarding records and records in relation to the management of the service. ¿

Updated 28 September 2018

This was an announced inspection which took place on 30 and 31 st July and 2 August 2018. The registered provider was given 48 hours' notice of the inspection, to ensure that the registered manager or other responsible person would be available to assist with the inspection visit as well as giving notice to people who used the service that we would like to speak with them. This was the first comprehensive rated inspection of the service following the registration of a new provider with the Care Quality Commission April 2017.

Direct Health Warrington is registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) for personal care to people in their own homes in the community. The service is in Warrington centre close to local amenities and to local transport links. At the time of the inspection the service supported 83 people in their own homes. They also had a small satellite office in Salford that staff used two days a week for meetings.

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 registered provider and registered manager used a variety of methods to assess and monitor the quality of the service. They carried out a lot of checks to all aspects of the service to make sure that each part of the service was operating appropriately. Visits to people being supported, telephone reviews, surveys and observational checks were carried out by the registered provider to ensure that the standards of care were maintained and of a good standard. Issues around the management of health and safety checks for the office and DBS checks for recent staff was not noted to be included in recent quality service managers audits. This audit tool would benefit from further review to show clearer evidence of ongoing required checks and monitoring of the service.

We received positive comments from people receiving support and their relatives acting on behalf of their family members. The majority of people were happy with staff and were positive about the standards of care received.

Staff responsible for supporting people with their medicines had ¿received training to ensure they had the competency and skills required.

There were sufficient staff to complete the scheduled visits for each person. A recruitment drive was in place to recruit further staff. The service had a monitoring system that continually checked the promptness of their visits and could take action, if staff were running late for any reason.

Staff were recruited following a safe and robust process to make sure they were suitable to work with vulnerable people. Staff were aware of their responsibilities in keeping people safe and had received training in safeguarding adults

Staff were given appropriate support through a programme of training and on-going supervision, and appraisal. Staff were positive about the training provided to them which gave them the skills and knowledge they needed to do their job.

Support plans contained up to date, detailed information about each person’s care and support. They included assessments and request from people how they liked their care to be provided. Staff were knowledgeable about the individual needs of the people they supported.

The complaints procedure was accessible to people. This was provided to people when they first choose the service for their care package. No complaints were raised at the time of inspection.