You are here

Harmony Home Aid Services Limited - Unit A2 Broomsleigh Business Park Good

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 26 February 2019

This inspection took place on 7 January 2019 and was announced. Harmony Home Aid Services Limited - Unit A2 Broomsleigh Business Park is a domiciliary care agency. The service is registered to provide personal care for people living in their own homes. It provides a service to older adults and younger disabled adults. At the time of the inspection, 103 people were using the service.

The previous inspection of the service was on 3 and 11 October 2017 and we found the service was not meeting all the regulations. Two breaches of regulation were found. One breach related to safe care and treatment because risk assessments did not always identify and manage potential risks for people, systems for the management of medicines were not effective, missed and late visits were not always recorded and there was not always a risk assessment recorded on staff records where this was appropriate. The second breach related to good governance because care records and risk assessments were not regularly checked to ensure they reflected people’s current needs.

We issued requirement notices for each of these breaches. The overall rating for this service was ‘Requires improvement’. We asked and received from the registered manager an action plan that detailed how they would make those improvements to the service.

At this inspection, we followed up on the previous breaches of regulation. We found that the registered manager had taken action to meet all of the regulations we inspected. The overall rating for this service is ‘good’.

The service had a registered manager in post. 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.

Staff completed assessments with people which identified risks associated with their health and well-being. The management plans guided staff to manage and mitigate potential risks.

People’s medicines were managed in a safe way. Each person had a medicines administration record (MAR). Staff completed these accurately. When a medicine was not administered staff used an appropriate code on the MAR to explain why. Staff completed an audit on MARs and reviewed supplies of medicines to ensure there was enough stock for people’s needs.

Staff understood how to protect people from harm and abuse. Staff followed the safeguarding processes in place to report allegations of abuse. Staff captured and investigated missed and late visits and took action to inform the local authority of these incidents for their investigation.

The provider had safer recruitment processes in place. Newly recruited staff completed pre-employment checks before their employment was confirmed and they were assessed as suitable to work with people using the service. People had enough staff to support them. The staff rota showed people received the assessed care and support required to meet their individual needs. The registered manager supported staff through an induction, training, supervision and an annual appraisal.

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.

People were provided with enough information for them to give staff their consent to receive care and support.

People said staff were kind and caring. People commented that staff respected them, their home and their privacy.

Staff supported people with their meal preparation and they had enough food and drink to meet their needs and preferences.

Staff completed assessments with people to identify their needs. Each person had a care plan that detailed the care and support people required to meet their needs.

People accessed health care services whe

Inspection areas



Updated 26 February 2019

The service was safe.

There were established safeguarding processes in place that staff followed to keep people safe.

Risks to people�s health and well-being were identified. Each person had a risk management plan that detailed the support the person needed to manage and mitigate those potential risks.

Missed and late calls were reported, monitored and managed safely.

Medicines were managed safely for people. There were effective systems in place for the management of medicines.

There were safe recruitment processes in place. Pre-employment checks were completed before staff were confirmed in their role.

There were enough staff available and deployed to meet people�s needs safely.



Updated 26 February 2019

The service was effective.

Staff had access to training, induction, supervision and an appraisal whilst employed at the service.

The principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) were followed by staff.

People received health care support when their health needs changed.

Staff provided people with meals that met their needs and preferences.



Updated 26 February 2019

The service was caring.

Staff treated people with kindness and respected their privacy and dignity.

People contributed to their care and support plans to ensure these remained relevant and reflected their needs.



Updated 26 February 2019

The service was responsive.

Each person had an assessment of their needs before they received a care service.

There was a complaints system in place. Staff responded to people�s concerns and complaints in a timely way.

No one required end of life care. Staff had training in end of life care to equip them to support people if they required this support.



Updated 26 February 2019

The service was well led.

The registered manager had an overview of the service because of the improvement of the quality assurance systems in place.

The registered manager worked in co-operation with organisations.

Staff felt supported by the manager and were awarded for the contributions to the service.