Archived: Flexi Coventry Limited

Flexi Coventry Ltd is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people with complex needs living in their own homes. At the time of our visit 13 people with complex medical needs, were being supported by the service.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

Relatives were confident their family members were safe when receiving care and support. People received their care calls at the times they expected, for the length of time agreed and from staff they knew. Risk associated with people’s needs and the environment were well managed. Medicines were managed in line with regulatory requirements and best practice guidelines.

People's needs were assessed, and personalised care was provided by staff who were well trained. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. The management team and staff had a good understanding of and worked within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (2005). The provider’s policies and procedures supported this.

Staff ensured people’s rights were upheld and were caring and thoughtful in their approach. People made decisions about their care and support. Staff felt cared for, valued and supported by the management team. Relatives confirmed staff had an in-depth knowledge of their family members’ needs.

The service was responsive to the needs of people and relatives. Detailed care plans provided staff with the information they required to provide care in line with people’s needs, wishes and preferences. Staff were trained to support people at the end stage of life, when needed. Relatives knew how to raise any concerns or complaints. The provider was meeting the requirements of the Accessible information Standard.

The management team were open, approachable and focussed on providing person centred care. Systems were in place to monitor and improve the quality of care provided. The management team and staff shared a passion for the provision of good quality care and worked in partnership with other professionals to improve outcomes for people. Everyone at Flexi Coventry Ltd was committed to working towards an outstanding rating.

The last rating for this service was Good (published 11 October 2016).

Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating of good.

Follow up: We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our methodology. If any concerning information is received, we may inspect sooner.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

We visited the offices of Flexi Coventry Ltd on 14 July 2016. We told the provider before the inspection visit we were coming so they could arrange for care workers to be available to talk with us.

The service had a registered manager. 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 felt safe using the service and there were processes to minimise risks to people’s safety. These included procedures to manage identified risks with people’s care and for managing people’s medicines safely.

Care workers understood how to protect people from the risk of abuse and keep people safe. Care workers suitability and character was checked during the recruitment process to make sure they were suitable to work with people who used the service.

The registered manager understood the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA), and care workers respected people’s decisions and gained people’s consent before they provided personal care.

There were enough care workers to deliver the care and support people required. People told us care workers arrived at the time expected and stayed long enough to complete the care people required. People said they were supported by care workers who they knew and felt comfortable with. People told us care workers were kind and knew how they liked to receive their care.

Care workers received an induction when they started working for the service and completed regular training to support them in meeting people’s individual needs effectively. People told us care workers had the right skills to provide the care and support they required. Support plans and risk assessments contained relevant information for staff to help them provide the care people needed in a way they preferred.

People knew how to complain and information about making a complaint was available for people. Care workers said they could raise any concerns or issues with the management team, knowing they would be listened to and acted on.

Staff felt supported to do their work and people felt able to contact the office and management at any time. There were systems to monitor and review the quality of service people received and understand the experiences of people who used the service. This was through regular communication with people and staff, returned surveys, spot checks on care workers and a programme of other checks and audits.

We spoke to three people who used the service, or who had relatives who used the service. People told us they were happy with the care provided. One person told us "My wife really enjoys their company." Another person told us "They've never let us down." Another person said "I am more than satisfied, I would give them 100%."

We looked at four sets of care records to see how people were supported. We saw that each person had an initial assessment of their individual support requirements which contained detailed information about the type of care they required.

We found that people who used the service were protected from the risk of abuse because the agency had policies and procedures in place to identify the signs of abuse and respond to concerns of abuse.

We asked people if they had consistent care staff. We were told they did. Staff told us they had sufficient time to do everything they needed to do and were well supported by the agency.

Records we looked at showed the agency had systems in place to monitor the quality of the service provided. We saw audits were conducted to identify areas that could be improved. We also viewed customer satisfaction surveys which showed people were happy with the service.