Background to this inspection
Updated
24 January 2020
The inspection
We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.
Inspection team
The inspection was conducted by one inspector.
Service and service type
This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats.
The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.
Notice of inspection
We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection. This was because it is a small service and we needed to be sure that the provider or registered manager would be in the office to support the inspection.
Inspection activity started on 14 January 2020 and ended on 16 January 2020. We visited the office location on 14 January 2020.
What we did before the inspection
We looked at all the information we held about the provider. This included information we received when they registered the location. We also looked at the provider's own website and public information about the agency.
The provider was not asked to complete a provider information return prior to this inspection. This is information we require providers to send us to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We took this into account when we inspected the service and made the judgements in this report.
During the inspection
We looked at the care records for five people who used the service, records of medicines administration and logs of care visits. We also looked at records of accidents, incidents, complaints and safeguarding alerts and the provider's systems for assessing and monitoring the quality of the service. We viewed the recruitment, training and support records for five members of staff, along with information shared with staff and meeting minutes.
We met the care manager, registered manager and one of the directors. We also met other staff working in the office, including the field care supervisor and quality assurance manager. Two care workers visited the office, and we spoke with them. We received written feedback from four other care workers.
After the inspection
We spoke with the relatives of five people to ask for feedback about their experiences. We did this on 16 January 2020.
Updated
24 January 2020
About the service
Churchill Health Care (Ealing) is a domiciliary care agency providing personal care and support to people living in their own homes. At the time of the inspection they were offering support with personal care to 17 people. The majority of people were older adults, although the agency also provided a service to younger adults with disabilities. Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also consider any wider social care provided.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People were happy with the service they received. They felt involved in making decisions about their care. They told us the agency listened to them and provided a service which was personalised and met their needs.
Care plans were clear and included details about people's individual needs and how they wanted to be cared for. The agency had assessed the risks involved in providing care and had developed plans to minimise these.
People received their medicines in a safe way and as prescribed. They also had the support they needed with preparing meals, shopping and accessing the community. The agency carried out regular checks to make sure staff were providing safe care and to reassess any changes in people's needs.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
The staff were happy working for the agency. They told us they would recommend working there to others and they felt supported. The provider's recruitment procedures made sure the staff were suitable. They undertook a range of training to ensure they could provide effective care. The staff were regularly supervised and had good communication with managers.
People had the same regular care workers assigned to care for them. They arrived on time and stayed the agreed length of time, completing all assigned tasks. There were enough staff, and the agency made sure they had enough time to travel between visits, so they were not late and did not feel rushed. There were electronic call monitoring systems, so the managers could identify if a care worker did not arrive for a visit, or if care tasks were not completed.
There were effective systems for monitoring the quality of the service and receiving feedback from stakeholders. The managers knew everyone who used and worked at the service and had regular contact with them. Feedback they had received was positive, and where they had received complaints, they had acted on these and learnt from them. There were appropriate systems for dealing with accidents, incidents and emergency situations. These were being followed.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection
This was the first inspection of the service since it was registered on 27 March 2019.
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the date of registration.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.