Archived: Advance

Updated 22 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.

This inspection took place on 1 April 2016. The inspection was announced. The inspection team consisted of one inspector.

We looked at the information we held about the service, which included checking ‘notifications’. Notifications are changes, events or incidents that the provider must tell us about.

We contacted commissioners for health and social care, responsible for funding the person who used the service and asked them for their views about the agency. Some concerns were expressed about the provision of personal care to the person using the service and we followed up these issues in this inspection.

During the inspection we spoke with two relatives, the registered manager, the service manager and two care workers.

We also looked in detail at the care and support provided to the person who used the service, including their care records, audits on the running of the agency, staff training and staff recruitment records.

Updated 22 June 2016

Advance provides personal care for people living in their own homes. On the day the inspection the registered manager informed us that there was one person receiving a service from the agency.

A registered manager was in place. 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run. The registered manager was also the provider.

Relatives we spoke with said they thought the agency ensured that their relative received safe personal care.

Staff had been trained in safeguarding (protecting people from abuse) and understood their responsibilities in this area.

Risk assessments were not fully detailed to assist staff to support people safely.

Staff had been safety recruited to ensure they were appropriate to supply personal care to people.

Staff had training to ensure they had the skills and knowledge to be able to meet people's needs.

Staff understood their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) to allow, as much as possible, people to have effective choice about how they lived their lives.

Staff had awareness of a person's health care needs so they were in a position to refer to health care professionals if needed.

A relative we spoke with told us that the staff member he knew was friendly and caring.

The person had been involved in making decisions about how personal care was to be provided.

The care plan was individual to the person using the service, but more evidence was needed to evidence that the person’s individual needs were met.

Relatives told us they would tell staff or management if they had any concerns and but were not confident this would be comprehensively followed up.

Staff were satisfied with the support they received and how the service was run in the best interests of people receiving a service.

Management carried out audits to ensure the service was running properly.