You are here

We are carrying out a review of quality at Agincare UK Medway. We will publish a report when our review is complete. Find out more about our inspection reports.

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 19 March 2016

We inspected the service on 23 February 2016. This inspection was announced. We gave short notice of the inspection because the registered manager was often out of the office supporting staff and some of the people using the service were often out at their daily activities. We needed to be sure that they would be available to speak with us. We made telephone calls to people that used the service and staff on the 26 February and 3 March 2016.

Agincare UK Medway is a domiciliary care agency which provides personal care to older people, including people with dementia and physical disabilities. Agincare UK Medway also provides a Medway Carers Respite Service. This is a four hour service, usually once a week that enables the relative of the person needing support to have a period of time for themselves. The agency provides care for people in the Medway area and the office is situated in Chatham. There were over 200 people receiving support to meet their personal care needs on the day we inspected.

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’s views about the service they received were positive. People told us staff were kind, caring and communicated well with them. Communication between staff within the service was good.

The service had suitable processes in place to safeguard people from different forms of abuse. Staff had been trained in safeguarding people and in the agency’s whistleblowing policy. Staff were confident that they could raise any matters of concern with the provider, the registered manager, or the local authority safeguarding team. Staff were trained in how to respond in an emergency (such as a fire, or if the person collapsed) to protect people from harm.

The registered manager and staff had received training about the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and understood when and how to support peoples best interests if they lacked capacity to make certain decisions about their care.

People were able to express their opinions and views. The field care supervisors involved people in planning their care by assessing their needs on their first visit to the person, and then by asking people if they were happy with the care they received. There was a strong emphasis on person centred care. People were supported to plan their support and they received a service that was based on their personal needs and wishes. The service was flexible and responded positively to changes in people’s needs.

The field care supervisors carried out risk assessments when they visited people for the first time. Other assessments identified people’s specific health and care needs, their mental health needs, medicines management, and any equipment needed. Care was planned and agreed between the service and the individual person concerned. People were supported by their family members to discuss their care needs, if this was their choice to do so.

People were supported with meal planning, preparation and eating and drinking. Staff supported people, by contacting the office to alert senior staff of any identified health needs so that their doctor or nurse could be informed.

People were supported and helped to maintain their health and to access health services when they needed them.

There were suitable numbers of staff available to meet people’s needs, and people were informed if their planned care had been allocated to another member of staff.

The service had robust recruitment practices in place. Applicants for post were assessed as suitable for their job roles. All staff received induction training which included essential subjects such as maintaining confidentiality, moving and handling, safeguarding people a

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 19 March 2016

The service was safe.

Safe recruitment procedures were in place.

There were enough staff deployed to meet people’s needs.

Risks to people’s safety and welfare were managed to make sure they were protected from harm.

People were protected from abuse or the risk of abuse. The registered manager and staff were aware of their roles and responsibilities in relation to safeguarding people.

Effective

Good

Updated 19 March 2016

The service was effective.

Staff had received training relevant to their roles. Staff had received supervision and good support from the management team.

People gave us positive feedback about the choices they were supported to make and the support they received at meal times.

Staff had a good understanding and awareness of the Mental Capacity Act.

People received medical assistance from healthcare professionals when they needed it.

Caring

Good

Updated 19 March 2016

The service was caring.

People were treated with dignity and respect. Staff knew people well.

People were involved with their care. People’s care and treatment was person centred.

People’s confidential information was respected and locked away to prevent unauthorised access.

Responsive

Good

Updated 19 March 2016

The service was responsive.

The service was flexible and responded quickly to people’s changing needs or wishes.

People received care that was based on their needs and preferences. They were involved in all aspects of their care and were supported to lead their lives in the way they wished to.

The service had a complaints policy, people were aware of how to make a complaint. The registered manager had responded to complaints appropriately.

Well-led

Good

Updated 19 March 2016

The service was well led.

There were systems in place to assess the quality of the service.

Staff were aware of the whistleblowing procedures and were confident that poor practice would be reported appropriately.

The registered manager and nominated individual were aware of their responsibilities.

The service had a clear set of values and these were being put into practice by the staff and management team.