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

Archived: Allied Healthcare Luton

Overall: Requires improvement read more about inspection ratings

1st Floor, 29-37 Langham House West, Mill Street, Luton, Bedfordshire, LU1 2NA (01582) 720871

Provided and run by:
Nestor Primecare Services Limited

Important: This service is now registered at a different address - see new profile

All Inspections

12 August 2015

During a routine inspection

This inspection took place on 12 August 2015 and it was announced.

At our previous inspection in February 2014 there were two areas where the service was not meeting regulations. These related to people receiving care at the times agreed within their care plans and the assessment of risks to people using the service. At this inspection we found that improvements had been made to the assessment of risk and additional improvements were planned for the scheduling of care visits.

Allied Healthcare Luton is a care agency providing personal care and support for people in their own homes. At the time of our inspection the agency was providing a service to 150 people.

The agency does not have a registered manager as required by the Care Quality Commission (CQC). A registered manager is a person who has registered with the CQC 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. At the time of this inspection the agency had been without a registered manager for 12 months. There was, however, a manager at the agency.

People told us that they felt safe but carers often arrived late and were not always the carer they expected.

People’s needs had been assessed and care plans took account of their individual needs although individual preferences and choices were not always recorded. There were risk assessments in place that gave guidance to staff on how individual risks to people could be minimised. There were systems in place to safeguard people from the risk of possible harm.

Staff had an understanding of safeguarding processes and had completed training. Staff were supported by way of spot checks, supervisions and appraisals however these were not consistently completed for all staff.

The provider had effective recruitment processes in place and was actively recruiting additional staff to support people safely. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities to seek people’s consent prior to care being provided and were kind and respectful.

The provider had an effective process for handling complaints and concerns. These were recorded, investigated, responded to and actions to prevent recurrence were recorded.

The provider encouraged feedback on the service provided. However, the result of the latest survey had not been received by the agency. Therefore, an action plan had not been developed to address the issues raised with a view to continuously seeking to improve the service.

The provider organisation had effective quality monitoring processes in place.

21, 27, 28 January and 3 February 2014

During a routine inspection

During our inspection of Allied Healthcare Luton on 21 January 2014, we spoke with the registered manager, a field care supervisor and five care workers at the office. Over the next 10 days we spoke with 22 of the 200 people who use the service and the relatives of seven people. We also spoke with a further nine members of staff.

On the whole, people were complementary about the service. One person said, 'The staff are caring and trained to know my needs.' Another person said, 'It's a wonderful service and suits me fine.' However nine people told us that at times care staff had arrived later than the 30 minutes they were told to allow them. They told us they had not been informed of the reason for the lateness.

We found that people's needs had been assessed and appropriate support plans and risk assessments were in place. However, care and treatment was not always delivered in line with people's individual needs.Those people who required support with medication told us this was given to them correctly.

People told us they believed the staff were experienced. One person said, 'I have confidence in the staff, if my skin's red they'll call the district nurse and get her to visit.'

The agency had processes in place to assess and monitor the care provided to people, however these were not always effectively used. Some of the people we spoke with told us they were not confident they were listened to and concens were managed effectively.

2 October 2012

During a routine inspection

During our visit to SAGA Homecare Luton on 2 October 2012, people told us they thought the care they received from the service was ''excellent'' and their experience of the service was ''all very positive''. People told us staff respected their privacy and dignity and that they had been involved in discussing their care plans and daily requirements. People said the staff were friendly, knowledgeable and helpful, and trained and experienced to carry out their roles.

The service had recently moved from Leighton Buzzard and was in the process of beginning a merger with another provider and location. The provider and registered manager were working to maintain suitable staffing levels during this time and also introducing a comprehensive quality assurance scheme, although this was not fully embedded at the time of the inspection.