You are here

Archived: Homecare For You Limited Good

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

Reports


Inspection carried out on 4/5 August 2015

During a routine inspection

Homecare For You Limited is a care agency situated near the centre of Blackburn. Homecare For You provides personal care for children and adults in their own homes. The service operates mainly during the day with management running an on call system for out of hours and emergencies.

We last inspected this service in May 2014 when the service met all the regulations we inspected. This unannounced inspection took place on the 04 and 05 August 2015.

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.

Staff were aware of and had been trained in safeguarding procedures to help protect the health and welfare of people who used the service. All the people who used the service said they felt safe.

Staff were recruited using current guidelines to help minimise the risk of abuse to people who used the service.

There was a modern office with all the necessary equipment to provide a functional service for people who used the service and for the staff. There was a dedicated training room with equipment such as a hoist and slings and information about many aspects of care for staff to follow good practice.

People who used the service helped develop their plans of care to ensure their wishes were taken into account. Plans of care were updated regularly.

Risk assessments were conducted to help keep people who used the service and staff safe.

The registered manager and senior members of staff updated policies and procedures and conducted audits to help ensure the service maintained standards.

Staff received the training they needed and regular supervision to check they were performing well. Staff were encouraged to come into the office to talk to management if they wished. New staff had to complete an induction before they worked with vulnerable people.

Although people who used the service lived in their own houses and choose what they ate staff were trained in nutrition and safe food handling to give advice to people about their meals.

The agency asked for people’s views around how the service was performing and we saw evidence that the registered manager responded to their views.

There was a suitable complaints procedure for people to voice their concerns. The people we spoke with said they did not have any concerns but knew how to contact the office if they did.

Staff received infection control training and were supplied with protective equipment when it was required.

Inspection carried out on 14 May 2014

During a routine inspection

We spoke with two people who used the service, the registered manager, a staff member and two family members of people who used the service during this inspection. We also looked at the quality assurance systems. This helped answer our five questions; is the service caring? Is the service responsive? Is the service safe? Is the service effective? Is the service well led? Below is a summary of what we found.

Is the service safe?

People were treated with respect and dignity by the staff. Two people who used the service told us, "They are honest and I trust them. I feel safe" and "I trust them and feel safe with them". We saw in one plan of care that staff were directed to only aid a person if he required it to help protect his privacy and dignity. The training matrix and staff files showed staff had been trained in safeguarding topics and there was a whistle blowing procedure for staff to report any issues with confidence. We saw that there were effective systems on the prevention of or reporting possible abuse.

Systems were in place to make sure that managers and staff learn from events such as accidents and incidents, complaints, concerns, whistleblowing and investigations. Two people who used the service said, "We can get hold of the service in an emergency. We can contact them when we want" and "I can contact the manager if I need anything and she sorts it out". We saw that managers conducted audits on concerns, incidents, compliments and complaints to help improve the service. We noted no complaints had been made despite the regular contact with people who used the service or their families to ask their views.

We looked at documentation which showed the care agency looked at any hazards to care and treatment and conducted risk assessments to help protect the health and welfare of people who used the service and staff. We saw that electrical and fire equipment had been maintained in the office. The checks helped keep people safe from possible harm.

Is the service effective?

People�s health and care needs were assessed with them, and they were involved in writing their plans of care. Specialist dietary, mobility and equipment needs had been identified in care plans where required. People who used the service told us, "They write about me after every visit. They put down if there are any changes. We read it and it is accurate" and "They write in my care plans and involve me in the plan and any changes. I read what they have written and it is what they have done. The care I get is the care I require". A family member said, "They tell us what they write about him in the care plan. They ask what we want from the service". Quality assurance survey forms showed us that people were satisfied with the service they received.

People who used the service were supported to make decisions and helped with their finances if it was required. People told us they were involved in their care and support.

Systems were in place to make sure that managers and staff learn from events such as accidents and incidents, complaints, concerns, whistleblowing and investigations. This reduced the risks to people and helped the service to continually improve.

Staff we spoke with and from the documents we looked at we saw that staff had been trained in mandatory topics such as health and safety, first aid, food hygiene, fire awareness, moving and handling, infection control and the administration of medication. A person who used the service told us, "My main carer is good and very professional although they are all well trained and know what they are doing". A family member said, "We get the same staff and this works well because they know him. They seem to be well trained. They always use the hoist and know what to do for him". Staff were sufficiently trained to deliver effective care.

We saw that the office was well equipped to run effectively.

Two people who used the service said staff were "reliable" and came on time. They stayed the amount of time allocated for their tasks. One person said her main care worker went beyond what she was required to do.

Is the service caring?

Two people who used the service told us, "The staff are pleasant and explain any care they give to my husband. They tell him what they are going to do" and "I have two excellent care staff. I have quite a new one and I rang social services today to say how much I like her and would like her to continue". People were supported by kind and attentive staff.

People who used the service, their family and friends were asked about their views of the care home. This included a bi-annual survey which we looked at and saw the positive results. The provider used the comments and surveys to improve the service.

People had what the service called 'personal care plans'. The plans contained detailed past histories. The information gave staff an insight into people's likes and dislikes and their wishes. We saw that staff were careful to meet the ethnicity of people who used the service by providing suitable staff who matched them well. Some staff were aware of people's religious or ethnic care needs and provided care sensitive to their needs. Care was provided in accordance with people's diverse needs, which included any religious or ethnic needs.

Is the service responsive?

The service supplied people with their out of hours telephone numbers. All the people and the relatives we spoke with were satisfied with the availability of the service in an emergency. One person was delighted her carer had "Given me her own number to call if I ever need to urgently".

The service conducted surveys and contacted people who used the service on a regular basis to ensure they received the care they needed.

The service held regular staff meetings to gain and react to their views. Staff were sometimes subject to spot checks to ensure they were delivering the care they were supposed to. Plans were regularly updated to make sure any changes were recorded and the plans amended.

Is the service well-led?

We saw that the service worked well with other agencies and organisations. We saw that meetings with professionals were arranged if it was necessary.

The service had quality assurance systems in place and records showed that people who used the service and other organisations were happy with the service provided. Staff we spoke with felt supported. A member of staff said, "I think we are well trained and supported. The agency is good to work for. I like my job". As a result the quality of the service was continually improving.

We saw that staff were well trained and understood their roles. Staff also had access to a copy of the Skills for Care codes of conduct. This document guides staff on how to lead other staff and what is expected of each individual. This helped to ensure people received a good quality service at all times.

Inspection carried out on 25 April 2013

During a routine inspection

One person who used the service told us, "I think this is a very good service" and one family member said, "I am more than satisfied with the care staff and they deserve a gold medal for all they do". We looked at the results of a recent quality assurance survey which had been sent to people who used the service or their family members. The results showed that people were very satisfied with important details such as they were treated with privacy and dignity, staff were reliable and timely with their visits, the service could be contacted in an emergency, their customs and traditions were taken into account and they felt safe and were aware of how to make a complaint if they had one. People we spoke with were satisfied with the service.

People we spoke with told us staff were reliable and they were looked after by the same staff who knew them well.

Plans of care we examined were detailed and people had signed their consent to care and treatment.

We looked at staff records and found staff received formal supervision, spot checks in their care work and appraisals to help support them to provide a good service.

Inspection carried out on 15 October 2012

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We conducted this inspection to follow up on the compliance action we made at the scheduled inspection in May 2012 regarding Regulation 23 Outcome 14 Supporting Staff. We found that the service had improved their systems to supervise staff.

Inspection carried out on 2 May 2012

During a routine inspection

We spoke to three people who used the service who told us that care was good and they received the care they needed. People commented, "They give me the care I need", "Staff are very reliable and helpful" and "They do everything that I ask them to do. I am very glad of them actually".

The three staff members we spoke to told us they were aware of the importance of updating the care plans and what they needed to do should an emergency arise. Two of the staff member said, "I would inform the family and the office if I find anything untoward. I record how I feel they are when I leave to let the next carer know of any changes" and "I write in the care plans and say what I have done or if there is anything new to report".

We spoke to three people who used the service. They told us they felt safe being cared for by the agency staff. People told us, "They make sure I am safe and they keep my property secure", "I feel very safe with the staff who are looking after us" and "I feel safe. They would not have a chance to abuse me. Anyhow they are very kind". People using the service did not feel at risk of abuse.

Three staff members we spoke to said they had undertaken safeguarding training and would use the whistle blowing policy to report any suspected abuse to keep people safe from harm.

We spoke to three people who used the service and they said staff were, "Good", "Kind" and "Caring". Staff had been robustly recruited to ensure they were suitable to look after vulnerable adults.

People who used the service told us they usually had the same members of staff to help with the continuity of their care.

Three staff members we spoke to told us, "I love working here. The managers listen to you and I never have any problems with management. I feel very supported. I get a great deal of job satisfaction with looking after people. I like to get involved with the families. I enjoy working here and am really happy. They have given me all the training I need and I would like to progress. I like to work for any rewards I get", "I like working here. I love it" and "I think we are well supported by management. I like working here because I love the job. I like helping people. I have worked in the hospital. I like working here and there are no problems". Staff questioned were able to express their opinions to help improve the service.