You are here

Archived: Home Instead Senior Care - Bromley, Chislehurst and Orpington Good

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

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 28 September 2016

This announced inspection took place on 14 July 2016. Home Instead Senior Care – Bromley, Chislehurst and Orpington provides personal care and support to people living in their own homes. At the time of our inspection there were 23 people receiving personal care. Home Instead Senior Care was last inspected on 24 April 2014. The service met all the regulations inspected at that time.

The service has 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 received support from staff who understood their health conditions and the related risks to their wellbeing. Staff had support plans to guide them on how to support people safely with their needs and identified risks. There were sufficient staff available to meet people’s needs. Staff sought people’s consent before they supported them with care.

People received support in line with the legal requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). Staff supported people who may lack mental capacity to understand and make decisions relating to the care they required. Where a decision had to be made for the person the service had followed 'best interest' process and involved healthcare professionals and people close to the person.

Staff told us the registered manager was approachable and supportive. Staff received regular supervisions and annual appraisals. The service used feedback to improve their practice. The registered manager ensured staff received training in relation to specific needs of people.

People told us staff were polite and treated them with respect. Staff involved people and their relatives in planning their care. Staff carried out risk assessments and there were care plans to provide them with guidance to support people safely.

People received the support they required to access healthcare services. Staff supported people with eating and drinking as appropriate and in line with guidance from healthcare professionals.

The registered manager regularly obtained feedback from people and their relatives on the support people received and their views of the service. The service considered people’s views and used them to improve the quality of their care and support.

People understood how to make a complaint and told us they were confident the registered manager would take action to resolve their complaints. The registered manager regularly monitored the quality of the service and improvements were made to the service.

Inspection areas



Updated 28 September 2016

The service was safe. Staff assessed risks to people and had plans in place to manage the risks. Staff knew how to recognise abuse and what action to take to protect people from harm.

People received their medicines safely as prescribed. There were sufficient staff to meet people�s needs and accompany them in the community when required.



Updated 28 September 2016

The service was effective. Staff received support and on-going training to develop their skills to meet people�s needs effectively.

Staff obtained people�s consent to care and treatment and supported people in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). Staff respected people�s choices. People received the support they required to eat, drink, and access the healthcare services they needed.



Updated 28 September 2016

The service was caring. People and their relatives told us staff were kind and friendly. They said staff treated them with respect and considered their views.

Staff knew people well and how they preferred to be supported. People were treated with dignity and their privacy respected.



Updated 28 September 2016

The service was responsive. People received care and support which met their individual needs and preferences. People and their relatives were involved in planning their support.

People�s concerns were responded to appropriately and people were asked for their views of the service.

People were encouraged and supported to follow their interests and participate in community activities.



Updated 28 September 2016

The service was well-led. People, their relatives and staff told us the service was well run. Staff told us the registered manager was open to their ideas to improve the service.

The registered manager regularly checked the quality of the service and made improvements when necessary.