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

Archived: AccuroCare Limited

Hayes Cottage, Grange Road, Hayes, Middlesex, UB3 2RR (020) 8848 0212

Provided and run by:
Regent Home Care (West Herts) Limited

All Inspections

14 May 2014

During a routine inspection

In this report the name of a registered manager appears who was not managing the regulatory activities at this location at the time of the inspection. Their name appears because they were still a registered manager on our register at the time. We spoke with nine people who were using the service, or their representatives and five care workers.

We considered all the evidence we had gathered under the outcomes we inspected. We used the information to answer the five questions we always ask;

' Is the service caring?

' Is the service responsive?

' Is the service safe?

' Is the service effective?

' Is the service well led?

This is a summary of what we found-

Is the service safe?

People told us they felt safe. They said the care workers supported them in a safe and caring way. People's needs and any risks to their wellbeing had been assessed and the care workers had access to this information. There were appropriate procedures to make sure people were kept safe and their money and medicines were managed appropriately. However, the agency had not always provided staff with the training and support they needed. They had not always carried out thorough checks on the suitability of new staff and the agency had not always reviewed people's care needs. Therefore people were at risk of receiving inappropriate or unsafe care.

Is the service effective?

People told us their needs were met. They told us the care workers usually arrived on time, but this was not always the case and sometimes this had caused problems. People were happy with the care they received and felt the agency adapted if they wanted anything changed.

Is the service caring?

People said the care workers were caring, kind and polite. They told us 'nothing was too much trouble' for some care workers and one person said, 'she goes the extra mile'. People told us the service was very important to them and met their needs well.

Is the service responsive?

People said the service was responsive if they wanted anything changed. They told us care workers responded to their individual needs and wishes each day. We identified a number of shortfalls in the service, these included the fact the staff had not had proper supervision and support and people who used the service had not had their needs reviewed. The manager and agency had already identified concerns in these areas and put in place action plans to address some of these concerns.

Is the service well-led?

The agency had good quality monitoring systems that had identified areas of concern. The manager was new to the service and had not yet been registered with CQC. There were a number of new senior staff. The manager had introduced new systems to address areas of concern.

31 July 2013

During a routine inspection

During our inspection we spoke with 13 people who use the service, two relatives and seven members of staff. We viewed 10 care records and 10 staff files. All the people we spoke with told us that they were happy with the care provided. One person said "the carers are always respectful, polite and very caring." Another said "the carers and office staff are very good, I can't fault them."

People told us the agency had involved them in decisions relating to their care and always treated them with consideration. All the people we spoke with told us that carers were punctual, stayed the agreed length of time and were adequately trained to meet their needs. One person said "the carers are very friendly and come on time, they are marvellous."

People were protected from abuse, the provider had safeguarding procedures in place and staff had received regular training in safeguarding adults and whistleblowing procedures.

There were arrangements in place to get feedback about the quality of the service through monthly telephone questionnaires and quarterly satisfaction surveys. People told us that they felt confident that the agency would listen to them if they had any concerns about their care. One person said "the office staff are always very helpful."

14 June 2012

During a themed inspection looking at Domiciliary Care Services

We carried out a themed inspection looking at domiciliary care services. We carried out 15 telephone interviews of people who use the service or their close relatives and visited three people in their homes to get their views about the service they received. We also talked to five care workers and three members of staff from the management team.

All people we spoke with were satisfied their care workers treated them kindly and respected their privacy. They confirmed that they could choose to have male or female care workers according to their preferences and that their choices were respected. They told us staff called them by their preferred names.

Many people said the agency's staff assessed their needs and prepared care plans when they were referred to the agency. However, many also did not remember if their care records were reviewed after they were drawn up to make sure these reflected their current needs.

People were complimentary about their usual care workers and said they were appropriately trained and knew what to do to meet their needs. One person said in relation to their care workers 'I trust them and they have a lot of patience and take time to make sure I feel safe and I am comfortable'. However, eight out of 18 people who gave us feedback told us there was no continuity of care workers. One person said 'our [care worker] was taken off and we had four different [care workers] all turning up late with no explanation. My [relative] gets very confused with different people'..There's just no continuity'. People who had different care workers said they were not informed of the names of the care workers who would visit them.

Twelve out of 15 people told us they have had to contact the office because their care workers were late and they rarely got a call to tell them the care workers were late. Punctuality and timekeeping was a quality indicator where the agency scored lower as compared to other indicators in the provider's satisfaction surveys. In response the provider said they had introduced a call monitoring system so they could monitor the punctuality of visits.

People we spoke with told us they had the contact details of the agency and would speak with the office staff if they had any concerns. Many also said they would involve their relatives, friends or their social worker if they were worried about their safety.