The Care Quality Commission
  • Services in your home
  • Homecare service

Arale Group Limited Also known as Arale Care

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Unit 29, Townmead Business Centre, William Morris Way, London, SW6 2SZ (020) 8129 6438

Provided and run by:
Arale Group Limited

All Inspections

During an assessment under our new approach

Date of assessment 19 March to 29 March 2024. Arale Care is a domiciliary care service, providing care to people living in their own home. At the time of our assessment the agency was supporting 29 people. We looked at 5 quality statements: Safeguarding, Involving people to manage risks, Safe and effective staffing, Independence, choice and control and Equity in experience and outcomes. We did not assess all quality statements at this inspection. For those areas we did not assess, we used the ratings awarded at the last inspection to calculate the overall rating. We did not identify breaches of any Regulations during this assessment. We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next assess them. We spoke with 5 people, 9 relatives and 4 staff including the registered manager. We reviewed records including care plans for 3 people and recruitment files for 3 staff. Following our visit on site we reviewed a range of service records including, staff training and supervision matrix, accident and incident logs, complaints and safeguarding logs and policies/procedures. Following this assessment the service continues to be rated good. This was because people received care that was safe and met their needs. The provider had an effective system to ensure staff were safely recruited, people were protected from harm and abuse. People were involved in their care and were able to make decision about their care (if possible). Staff were well trained and competent in their role. However, risk plans did not always have enough detail in them for staff to follow. We spoke to the provider about this, and they told us they would review risk assessments.

9 October 2018

During a routine inspection

This announced inspection took place on 9 and 10 October 2018. Arale Group Limited is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats. It provides a service to older adults. At the time of the inspection nine people were using the service. This was the first inspection of Arale Group Limited, since their registration in October 2017.

The service had a registered manager in post. 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.

People and their relatives told us they felt safe with staff and the service. The service had clear procedures to recognise and respond to abuse. All staff had completed safeguarding training. Risk assessments for people were in place, which provided sufficient guidance for staff to minimise identified risks. The service had a system to manage accidents and incidents to reduce recurrences. People were protected from the risk of infection.

The service had enough staff to support people and satisfactory background checks were carried out for staff before they started working. The service had an on-call system to make sure staff had support outside office working hours. The service provided an induction and training, and supported staff through regular supervision and spot checks to help them undertake their role.

Staff supported people to take their medicines safely. The provider had a policy and procedure which gave guidance to staff on their role in supporting people to manage their medicines safely.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. People consented to their care before it was delivered. The provider and staff understood their responsibilities within the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

People’s needs were assessed to ensure these could be met by the service. Staff used this information as a basis for developing personalised care plans to meet each person’s needs.

Staff supported people with food preparation. People’s relatives coordinated healthcare appointments to meet people’s needs, and staff were available to support people to access health care appointments if needed.

Staff supported people in a way which was caring, respectful, and protected their privacy and dignity.

People received personalised care that was responsive to their needs. Care plans were person centred and contained information about people’s personal life and social history, their health and social care needs, allergies, family and friends, and contact details of health and social care professionals. Care plans were reviewed regularly and were up to date. The registered manager told us that they began consultations with relevant professionals, about what aspects of people’s care records required to be translated in their native language, to enable people to read and understand what is written in their care records.

The service had a clear policy and procedure for managing complaints. People knew how to complain and would do so if necessary. The provider had a policy and procedure to provide end-of-life support to people, however they did not require end-of-life support. The registered manager demonstrated an understanding of the requirements of the role and their responsibilities under the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

The service had a positive culture, where people felt the service cared about their opinions and included them in decisions. We observed staff were comfortable approaching the registered manager and their conversations were friendly and open.

The provider had systems and processes to assess and monitor the quality of the care people received. The service sought the views of people who used the services. Staff felt supported by the provider. The provider had procedures in place to work in partnership with health and social care professionals.