Archived: MiHomecare - Isleworth

Updated 18 May 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 28 April and was announced.

The provider was given 48 hours’ notice because the location provides a domiciliary care service and we needed to be sure that someone would be available.

The inspection was carried out by a single inspector. Before the visit an expert-by-experience contacted people who used the service and their relatives by telephone. 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 who supported this inspection had experience of caring for older people.

Before the inspection we looked at all the information we had about the provider including notifications of significant events that occurred at the service.

During the inspection we looked at the care records of five people who used the service, three staff files and a range of records relating to the management of the service. We met with the registered manager, the regional manager, a senior care worker and the administrator.

Following the inspection, we telephoned 11 people who used the service and two relatives to obtain feedback about their experiences of using the service. We also telephoned two carers, and obtained feedback from two social care professionals involved in the care of people who used the service.

Updated 18 May 2016

The inspection took place on 28 April 2016 and was announced. We gave the provider 48 hours' notice because they offer a domiciliary care service and we wanted to make sure someone would be available.

The service was last inspected on 30 April 2013 and at the time was found to be meeting all the regulations we looked at.

MiHomecare – Isleworth is a domiciliary care agency providing personal care and support to people who live in their own homes. The majority of people using the service were over the age of 65 years, although some younger adults also received care. At the time of our inspection there were 52 people using the service. MiHomecare – Isleworth is part of a larger national organisation, MiHomecare Limited, providing personal care to adults in their own homes. MiHomecare started life as Enara – a company that had been providing home care services since 1996. In October 2012, it was renamed MiHomecare.

There was 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

Staff did not always follow the procedure for recording and safe administration of medicines. This meant that people were at risk of not receiving their medicines safely.

There were systems in place to assess and monitor the quality of the service, however these had failed to highlight issues with the safe recording and administration of people’s medicines.

Recruitment checks were in place to obtain information about new staff before they supported people unsupervised, although one staff file we looked at only contained one character reference.

The manager was not regularly supervised or appraised by senior management although they told us they met regularly.

The service employed enough staff and contingency plans were in place in case of staff absence.

There were procedures for safeguarding adults and the staff were aware of these.

The risks to people’s safety and wellbeing were assessed and regularly reviewed.

Staff received the training and support they needed to care for people.

People had consented to their care and support. The service had policies and procedures in place to assess people’s capacity, in line with the Mental Capacity Act (2005).

People’s health and nutritional needs had been assessed, recorded and were being monitored.

Feedback from people and relatives was positive about both the staff and the provider.People and relatives said the carers were kind, caring and respected their privacy and dignity. Most people received care from regular carers and developed a trusting relationship.

People and relatives were involved in decisions about their care and support.

People’s individual needs had been assessed and recorded in their care plans prior to receiving a service, and were regularly reviewed.

There was a complaints policy in place. People knew how to make a complaint, and felt confident that their concerns would be addressed appropriately.

The service conducted satisfaction surveys of people and their relatives. These provided vital information about the quality of the service provided.

People knew who the manager was and knew how to contact them when required.

Staff thought their manager was supportive and approachable.