The Care Quality Commission
  • Services in your home
  • Homecare service

Archived: Allied Healthcare - Shrewsbury

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Suite D, The Cypress Centre, off Sitka Drive, Shrewsbury Business Park, Shrewsbury, Shropshire, SY2 6LG (01743) 245848

Provided and run by:
Allied Healthcare Group Limited

All Inspections

16 July 2014

During a routine inspection

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 and to pilot a new inspection process being introduced by CQC which looks at the overall quality of the service.

This was an announced inspection. We gave the provider 48 hours notice of our intention to inspect. We last inspected this service 30 January 2014. The provider was meeting all the requirements of the law at that time.

The provider is registered to provide both personal and nursing care. At the time of our inspection no one using the service was receiving nursing care.

There was a registered manager for the service. 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People who used the service were kept safe because staff understood how to do this. They recognised what abuse was and what action to take should it happen.

Staff supported to maintain their independence in their own homes or by going out into the community. The service was flexible enough to provide staff to meet people’s changing needs.

Staff had the training and support to enable them to develop their knowledge and skills in order to carry out their roles.

The management team were approachable and asked the views of people who used the service in order to improve.

30 January 2014

During a routine inspection

People shared their experience of the care and support they received. Comments included, "The staff are all very caring and they are my friends”.

The provider was not carrying out the regulated activity of nursing care at this inspection. People who used the service received personal care and support from the agency.

People considered that the staff met their current needs and were very caring. They said, "I know who is coming and I feel safe with them in my home. I honestly don’t know what I would do without them". People considered staff were well trained to do their job. People said the service was responsive to their changing needs.

The recruitment, induction and training of staff was organised well. The provider ensured that new staff were properly supported to provide care to vulnerable people. Staff were enabled to acquire further skills and qualifications relevant to the role they were in.

People told us they were regularly asked if their service was satisfactory. People knew how to complain and considered the level of communication with the office staff was very good. Records kept at the office were very well maintained both as paper records and electronically. The provider used these and people’s opinions to monitor the quality of service provision and make changes to improve the service where necessary. This meant that the service was effective and well led.

12 December 2012

During a routine inspection

We spoke with four people who used the service, two relatives and five members of staff. People were very pleased with the care and support they received. They told us they found the service professional and reliable and their care workers were respectful and considerate at all times. One person told us, “I am more than satisfied with this agency. All of my care workers are absolutely great ".

People told us they felt fully involved with the assessment of their needs and planning for their care. They considered care workers had a good understanding of individuals' needs and preferences. Staff were able to share examples of how they respected people's

privacy and dignity and promoted their independence. People said they felt safe in the presence of their care workers. One relative commented,“I completely trust them to care for my family member in my absence ".

Staff had received training on protecting the people they supported. They were able to describe abuse and knew how to respond to protect people. There was a process in place to ensure that appropriate checks were done before staff began work in people's own homes. Staff told us they enjoyed their work and said they were well supported.

The agency ensured that people's views were considered and listened to. People had been provided with information of how to use the complaint process. They said staff were very approachable and understanding.

24 January 2012

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We carried out this review to monitor the continual improvements made by the agency since our last visit.

As part of the process we had telephone discussions with six people who received a service and two relatives to ask their views on the quality of the service that they received from the agency. We also spoke with six staff and the registered manager. On the day of our visit to the office we reviewed care files and looked at systems in place for monitoring the service provided.

Everyone we spoke with told us that they were very satisfied with the care and support that they received. People told us that they felt involved and consulted in relation to how they received their support. People said that staff knew how to meet their needs and listened to them when they expressed their preferences.

People told us that staff were flexible, caring and responsive. Everyone told us that they thought staff were well trained.

People told us that for most of the time staff arrived when they were expected and always stayed their allocated amount of time. Two people told us that staff were only late occasionally and on these occasions the office staff had contacted them to explain. Staff told us that the timing of calls, especially in rural areas, is an area where the agency could improve and the manager was aware of this.

We were told that the agency asked people if they were happy with the service received and everyone said that they would contact the office if they had any worries or concerns. People said that the managers were easy to talk to and listened to them.

Care plans seen were very detailed and centred around the indentified needs of the individual. This meant that likes and dislikes were recorded as well as any special needs. Staff told us that these were useful documents. Risks associated with providing individualised care and support were also documented and ways of reducing these risks were recorded. Again staff told us that these were useful tools to provide safe care.

The agency had systems in place to monitor the quality of the service provided and the registered manager demonstrated that the agency had responded positively when issues had been identified. The agency had numerous systems in place to monitor quality and all of the information recorded onto the computer system was also reviewed by senior managers within the organisation for additional monitoring. The manager was aware of the strengths and the challenges of the agency.