All inspections: Agincare UK Christchurch

The registered manager assisted us throughout this inspection. We spoke with two members of staff, a Field Care Supervisor and a care worker. We also spoke on the telephone with five people who received a service from Agincare Christchurch. The registered manager told us that the agency provided to a service to about 220 people in the Christchurch and surrounding areas.

The agency had sought the consent of people who used the service with respect to how they wished to be supported with personal care needs within their home. Where people did not have the capacity to give consent, their relatives or representative had been involved in how care and support should be provided.

The agency had carried out assessments of people's needs and put in place care plans so that care workers knew how to support people in the way that had been agreed. People receiving a service from Agincare Christchurch had been involved in developing their care plan.

The agency had taken steps to protect people from the risks of unsafe care and mistreatment.

The agency had robust recruitment procedures in place to make sure that suitable people were employed to work with vulnerable people.

The agency had good systems in place to monitor the quality of service provided to people.

We had previously inspected Agincare Christchurch in January 2011. At that inspection visit we were concerned that people did not always receive effective, safe and appropriate care and the service did not assess people's needs.

As a result of the inspection visit in 2011 we issued a compliance action to tell the provider to improve standards in relation to the care and welfare of the people using the agency. We carried out this unannounced inspection on the 1 March 2012 to review if compliance had been achieved.

The people we spoke with were complimentary about the domiciliary care and support they received saying it was discreet, respectful and reassuring.

People appreciated when they had consistent care staff visiting their home and said they always felt safe when receiving care and support. Two people said consistency was not always achieved.

We were told that care staff usually stayed at people's homes for the allocated time and usually arrived within the expected time. One person said 'I phone the office if staff are half an hour late and they tell me what is happening'.

Three of the four people we spoke with said staff knew what to do and how to provide the care and support needed. One person said that sometimes new staff were not clear. All the people we spoke with new about their plans of care.

Everyone we spoke with said they knew who they could speak to if they did not feel safe or had a complaint. All the people we spoke with said they had been provided with contact details for the office in Christchurch, and all added that staff on the end of the telephone had been polite and helpful.

People told us that they are generally satisfied with the service provided. Comments included that carers were 'marvellous' and 'always polite'.

People also told us about problems with the service. These related to lack of professionalism from carers and personal care needs not always being met. People raised concerns about communication with the agency's office. Sometimes people had visits when they did not need them or they had left messages with the office and these were not handled correctly

Archived: Agincare UK Christchurch

All Inspections

27 February 2013

During a routine inspection

1 August 2012

During an inspection looking at part of the service

15 December 2010

During an inspection in response to concerns