• Services in your home
  • Homecare service

Archived: SOS Homecare Limited - Statham House

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Statham House, Talbot Road, Manchester, Lancashire, M32 0FP (0161) 877 4459

Provided and run by:
SOS Homecare Ltd

Latest inspection summary

On this page

Background to this inspection

Updated 23 December 2017

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 25 and 26 October 2017. The service was given 48 hours' notice because the location provides a domiciliary care service and we wanted to visit the office, talk to staff and visit people who used the service in their own homes.

The inspection team included one inspector and two experts 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. During this inspection, the experts by experience conducted telephone interviews with people who used the service.

Before the inspection, we reviewed the 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. We also reviewed information we held including safeguarding information and notifications made to the Care Quality Commission. A notification is information about important events which the service is required to send us by law. We also contacted Trafford Council for information they held on the service.

We spoke with 21 people who used the service and 11 relatives. We also spoke with 10 members of staff including the registered manager, operations director, quality manager, HR officer, care coordinator and care workers. We looked at records relating to the service including care and support records, personnel files, medicines records, a variety of policies and procedures and quality assurance records.

Overall inspection

Good

Updated 23 December 2017

This inspection took place on 25 and 26 October 2017. The service was given 48 hours' notice because the location provides a domiciliary care service and we wanted to visit the office, talk to staff and visit people who used the service in their own homes.

SOS Homecare Limited - Statham House is a domiciliary care agency located in the borough of Trafford, Greater Manchester and provides personal care to adults within their own home. At the time of our inspection visit, 110 people used the service.

During 2016 the Care Quality Commission (CQC) inspected SOS Homecare Limited - Statham House on two occasions. In March 2016 we found the service was not compliant in ensuring people using the service received safe and appropriate care that met their needs. The service was rated ‘Inadequate’, placed into special measures and we told the provider to take appropriate action. In November 2016 we returned to the service and found steady progress had been made. This resulted in an overall rating of ‘requires improvement.’

During this inspection, we found sustained improvement in four out the five key questions. This meant the service achieved an overall rating of ‘Good.’

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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

We saw missed and late visits were analysed and detailed the circumstance why the missed or late visit had occurred. However, we found the benefits of new electronic technologies implemented by the service had yet to be fully embedded.

Recruitment and selection of staff was robust with safe recruitment practices in place. This included checks with the Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS). This helped to ensure potential

employees were suitable to work with vulnerable people.

The service had appropriate systems and procedures in place which sought to protect people who used the service from abuse. Staff demonstrated a working knowledge of local safeguarding procedures and how to raise a concern.

Where support with medicines was part of an assessed care need, these were ordered, stored, administered, recorded and disposed of safely and correctly. Staff were trained in the safe administration of medicines and kept relevant records.

Accidents and incidents were appropriately recorded and included details of preventive strategies used by the service to reduce the likelihood of such events occurring in the future.

The staff induction programme was robust and included mandatory training, opportunities for shadowing of more experienced staff and direct observations of practice before new employees were able to work unsupervised with people who used the service.

Services were delivered in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and staff sought consent prior to providing care and offered people choices to encourage people to make their own decisions.

People and their relatives told us they were happy with the care provided. People told us staff treated them with dignity and respect and promoted their independence

People engaged with an initial assessment and were involved in the planning of care. Regular reviews were conducted with people, their relatives and where appropriate, other professionals.

People received appropriate information, including details about the complaints procedure. People told us they were confident that if they were required to make a complaint, the management would respond and resolve their issue promptly.

We found there were systems in place to monitor the quality of the service provided to people which ensured good governance.

People and their relatives spoke highly of the management team and voiced that they would not hesitate to recommend the service to people needing support in their own home.