Archived: Arch Healthcare Ltd

Updated 11 September 2018

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 was carried out by an adult social care inspector. We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection visit because it is small and the manager is often out of the office supporting staff or providing care. We needed to be sure that they would be in.

We visited the office location on 9 August 2018 to see the registered manager and office staff; and to review care records and policies and procedures.

We gathered and reviewed information we held about the service prior to inspection. This included statutory notifications (notifications about events or changes the service is legally obliged to provide), feedback from the local authority and any feedback we had received from members of the public.

We did not ask the service to send us a provider information return (PIR). The PIR is a document we ask providers to send to us giving information about the service, what it does well and how it intends to make improvements.

During the inspection we spoke with the registered manager, who also provided care. We spoke with a relative of someone who used the service by telephone to gather their opinion of the service. We looked at two care plans and other documents related to people’s care, such as risk assessments and medicines administration records. We also reviewed other documentation relevant to the operation of the service, including training records and audits.

Updated 11 September 2018

Arch Healthcare Ltd is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats in the community. It provides a service to older adults, younger disabled adults, and children. At the time of the inspection, there was one person using the service however, we also reviewed records of people who had previously used the service. The service registered with CQC in August 2017 and this was their first rated inspection.

There was a registered manager in post at the time of the 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.

There were enough appropriately trained and qualified staff to meet people’s needs. Staff managed people’s medicines effectively, and staff were recruited in a safe way.

Risks to people were assessed appropriately, and staff demonstrated an understanding of how to protect people from abuse.

The service understood and operated under the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (2005). People’s health and wellbeing was monitored and upheld. People’s nutritional and hydration preferences were clearly recorded.

Interactions with healthcare professionals were clearly recorded and the service understood its role in supporting people to maintain a healthy lifestyle.

Staff received an appropriate induction, training programme and ongoing monitoring and support.

Relatives of people using the service told us staff were kind and caring. The service promoted people’s dignity, privacy and independence through its documentation and in practice. People’s diverse characteristics were considered and protected.

Care plans contained person-centred, holistic information and clear guidance for staff on how to care for people in the way they wanted. Care plans were regularly reviewed. The service had received no complaints since it registered, but there was a policy in place outlining how any complaints raised would be investigated and responded to.

There was a sufficiently robust quality assurance process in place. There was a clear vision for the service and its values were visibly promoted through its interview process and documentation. The service worked in conjunction with partner agencies to improve the quality of the service delivered. People and their relatives were engaged with in a positive way

The service was working under the principles of the Accessible Information Standard.