Background to this inspection
Updated
4 January 2019
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.
The inspection activity started on 22 and ended on 28 November 2018. It included visiting the office location on 22 and 26 November to see the registered manager; and to review care records and policies and procedures. On 23 and 28 November 2018, we spoke to 18 people or relatives who used the service via telephone and five staff. One inspector carried out this inspection.
Due to technical problems, the provider was not able to complete a Provider Information Return. This is information we require providers to send us at least once annually 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.
We looked at care plans and associated records for five people and records relating to the management of the service. These included one four staff recruitment files, accidents and incidents, quality assurance records and the computer based rota management system. We looked at key policies developed by the provider. We reviewed quality monitoring visits by the local authority and action plans developed by the provider in response to the feedback their feedback.
The service was last inspected in March 2016 where the service was rated good.
Updated
4 January 2019
This inspection took place on between 22 and 28 November 2018.
This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own homes. It provides a service to older adults.
At the time of inspection, there were 33 people receiving personal care services from the provider. Not everyone who used Mayfair Homecare Southampton received support in the form of a regulated activity CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with 'personal care'; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also take into account any wider social care provided.
The service had a registered manager in place at the time of our inspection. 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.
People told us that the provider’s arrangements to oversee the service outside of office hours were not effective. They felt the provider’s ‘On-Call’ service did not always effectively communicate when changes were made to people’s care or when staff were running late. The registered manager had recognised that improvements were needed and had implemented measures to improve the quality of this service. It was too soon to judge how effective these measures had been.
The provider assessed people’s needs to help ensure they received appropriate care. When people’s needs changed, the provider acted responsively to help ensure their changing needs were met.
The registered manager had overseen improvements to the service after feedback from the local authority. This included reforming their care planning document to enable it to better reflect people’s needs. People were involved in planning and reviewing their care and were asked for their feedback about how improvements could be made.
People received personalised care which reflected their equality, diversity and human rights. Staff understood the need to gain appropriate consent to care. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
There were appropriate systems in place to handle complaints and concerns.
There were safe systems in place to manage people’s medicines. The registered manager’s auditing and quality assurance processes had identified where staff needed additional training and support to ensure safe medicines management.
Staff received training which was relevant to their role. The registered manager monitored their performance and ongoing training needs through supervision and observation of their working practice.
People were safeguarded against the risks of abuse and harm. The provider had worked with the local safeguarding teams to investigate individual concerns when they arose and put plans in plan to help keep people safe.
Risks to individuals were assessed and mitigated. The provider had systems in place to help ensure people received their care during extreme circumstances such as bad weather. There were systems in place to reduce the risk of infections spreading.
People’s dietary needs were assessed and documented in their care plans and the service made adjustments to help enable people to access healthcare services when required.
The provider had an electronic rota management system in place which helped them to monitor the care people received. There were enough staff in place to meet people’s needs and senior staff were available to provide care if required. The provider had safe recruitment practices in place.
The registered manager fostered a strong sense of community involvement by encouraging staff to participate in charity and community based events.
People told us staff were friendly and caring in their role.
The provider understood the principles of providing compassionate care at the end of people’s lives.