• Services in your home
  • Homecare service

Archived: AJ Social Care Recruitment Limited - 4225 Park Approach

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Unit 4225 Park Approach, Rubicon Square, Thorpe Park, Leeds, West Yorkshire, LS15 8GB 0330 555 2277

Provided and run by:
AJ Social Care Recruitment Limited

Important: The provider of this service changed. See new profile

All Inspections

17 May 2016

During a routine inspection

This inspection took place between 17 and 20 May 2016 and was announced. At the last inspection in February 2015 we rated the service as requires improvement. We found the provider was breaching three regulations. People were not always protected against the risks of receiving care that was inappropriate or unsafe, and it was not clear in the care plans we looked at if the rights of people who lacked the mental capacity to make decisions were respected. Suitable arrangements were not in place to ensure staff were appropriately supported in relation to their responsibilities. At this inspection we found the provider had taken action to address the concerns raised at the last inspection and made improvements.

AJ Social Care Recruitment Limited is registered to provide personal care to people in their own home in the Leeds and Wakefield districts. At the time of the inspection, 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 who used the service and the relatives we spoke with told us the agency was well managed. Everyone said they would recommend the service to others. We received positive feedback from two local authorities. One described the service as ‘excellent’.

People who used the service and their relatives told us the safety of the service was good. They told us staff provided appropriate support when they administered medicines. However, when we looked at how medicines were managed we found this was not always being done safely and sometimes people did not receive their medicines as prescribed.

People who used the service and their relatives were mainly positive about the staffing arrangements although three people commented that sometimes different care workers visited. They said staff arrived on time but if ever they were running late they received a call from the office. People told us they found office staff helpful, and felt comfortable contacting them if they wanted to discuss anything. People told us they did not have any complaints about the service.

People consented to and made decisions about their care. Where a person lacked mental capacity; assessments for specific decisions had been completed. People we spoke with were complimentary about the care workers who visited them. They described them as “lovely”, “polite”, “very good” and “very nice”. People had care plans that usually identified how their care needs should be met. Their preferences, likes and relationships were incorporated into their care plan so staff knew what was important.

Staff were confident people received good care. They told us their colleagues were caring and treated people with respect. Staff were supported to do their job well because they received appropriate training and supervision.

People who used the service, relatives and staff provided feedback about their experience through surveys. We saw a recent survey showed 98% of customers were satisfied with the service. Staff received a ‘daily communication’ email and various team and management meetings were held. Opportunities for care workers to attend meetings were not regular so opportunities for team discussions were limited.

The provider had an effective system for monitoring the quality of the service. They supported and worked alongside other care providers by sharing information on hot topics such as recruitment and retention.

We found a breach of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. You can see the action we have told the provider to take at the end of this report.

17 February 2015

During a routine inspection

This was an announced inspection carried out on 17 February 2015.

AJ Social Care Recruitment Limited provides personal care to approximately 100 people in their own homes in Leeds and Wakefield districts.

At the time of our inspection 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.

The provider had not taken steps to assess people’s capacity when they were unable to make decisions. This ensures the rights of people who lacked the mental capacity to make decisions were respected.

The service did not have a fully operational mechanism for monitoring staff training or staff competency. Staff did have the opportunity to attend supervision meetings.

We found there were enough staff employed by the service to meet people’s needs. Staff had been employed following standard recruitment policies and procedures and had induction training before they commenced work unaccompanied.

People who used the service and family members were concerned about the timing of visits regarding the call times being adhered to.

People received their medication as prescribed and they were satisfied with the support they received with this. However, we saw some signature gaps in the medication administration records.

We found care and support plans reflected people’s needs and contained sufficient and relevant information. However, some people we spoke with did not always know which member of staff would be visiting them. People were involved in developing their plan of care and had their own copy. Staff recorded what they had done at each visit. People told us staff knew how to respect their privacy and dignity.

People were given information on how to make a complaint. However, some people stated complaints were not always responded to appropriately.

People told us they felt safe whilst staff were delivering care in their home. We found staff had a good knowledge of how to keep people safe from harm and there were enough staff to meet people’s needs. People who used the service were happy with the staff and they got on well with them. Staff discussed and agreed with people how risks would be managed which ensured their safety.

People’s nutritional needs had been assessed and people told us they were satisfied with the support they received with their meals and drinks.

People’s physical health was monitored as required. This included the monitoring of people’s health conditions and symptoms so appropriate referrals to health professionals could be made.

There were effective systems in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service provided. We saw copies of reports produced by the management team. We saw recently returned surveys from people who used the service which were dated January 2015. They rated the service with above average or outstanding.

We found multiple breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2010 which has since been replaced by Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.

6, 10 February 2014

During a routine inspection

Care plans were created with input from the people who used the service and/or their relative. People's wishes were always respected where possible. Before people received any care or support they were asked for their consent and the Provider acted in accordance with their wishes. The care plans were individual and reflected background, culture and preferences.

People's needs were assessed and care and support was planned and delivered in line with their individual care plan. The care plans were written in a person centred way and described the likes and dislikes for each person.

We spoke with 18 people who used the service and care workers during our visit, comments included:

'Very reliable staff, always on time, they never let you down.'

'Staff are very polite, my Mum has a routine and a care plan and they write in it every time they come.'

People who used the service were complimentary about the staff. Their comments included:

"Can't thank (name of staff) enough she's been brilliant.'

We saw documentary evidence had been provided to show evidence of identity. Records of Criminal Record Bureau checks were available and held securely.

People's personal records including medical records were accurate and fit for purpose.

14 May 2012

During an inspection in response to concerns

People told us that they were happy and satisfied with the care and support being provided. Comments made to us during this review included 'all I've got is positives' and 'I've no problems, it is working very well for us at the moment'. People said that their carers were reliable and professional. Comments made to us about the service's staff included 'Staff are fantastic and they look after my mum very well' and 'staff are friendly and polite'.

People told us the service was reliable and that staff were usually on time and stayed for the agreed length of time. People told us that if staff were going to be late someone always let them know. People said that they felt able to tell staff if they required any changes to the way in which they were cared for and would also happily talk to the manager of the service.

People who use the service said they feel safe and would feel comfortable discussing concerns with staff and the manager of the service.

We carried out this review because we had received concerns about the care of people who use the service because staff were not trained to meet the needs of the people. And often visits to the people who use the service were late or missed. During our visit the concerns raised about the service have not been substantiated.

26 January 2012

During a routine inspection

People we spoke with said they were treated well. One person who uses the service said, 'They are all very polite.' Another person said, 'They are all respectful and some even ask if they should take their shoes off.'

People we spoke with told us staff from the agency had visited them and asked them about the care they required. One representative of a person who uses the service said, 'At the beginning, we all decided what my dad wanted, and if he needs anything else they will always accommodate. He thinks they're brilliant.'

On the whole people were very satisfied with the service they received. Several people told us the same staff usually visit so they received consistency, and the care they received met their individual needs and wishes. People told us that they had care records in their house that staff use as guidance.

One person said, 'The girls are wonderful. They do change a bit but it's usually the same ones. All are very kind.' Another person said, 'I'm highly satisfied. They always check I'm ok and ask if I want anything else. Sometimes they are late but not very often. '

Some people said the timing of the visits was very good; others said the care workers were sometimes late. Staff told us, in the main, they had enough time to do their visits.

Staff we spoke with said they had enough information to understand people's needs and how they should be met. They said risks are properly assessed and any changes in needs are dealt with appropriately by the management team, although some thought there were sometimes slight delays. They said generally the care planning process worked well.