Background to this inspection
Updated
8 April 2020
The inspection
We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.
Inspection team
The inspection was carried out by one inspector, one assistant inspector and two Experts by Experience. An Expert by Experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone using this type of care service.
Service and service type
This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats and specialist ‘extra care’ housing. Extra care housing is purpose-built or adapted single household accommodation in a shared site or building. The accommodation is bought or rented and is the occupant’s own home. People’s care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. CQC does not regulate premises used for extra care housing; this inspection looked at people’s personal care and support service.
The service had two managers registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.
Notice of inspection
This inspection was unannounced.
We gave the service 24 hours’ notice of the inspection. This was because we needed to obtain the consent from selected people receiving personal care and their relatives to be to be interviewed by the experts by experience. We also needed to be sure the provider or registered manager would be in the office to support the inspection.
The inspection activity started on 26 February 2020 and ended on 6 March 2020. We visited the office location on the 4 and 6 March 2020.
What we did before the inspection
The provider was not asked to complete a provider information return prior to this inspection. This is information we require providers to send us to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We took this into account when we inspected the service and made the judgements in this report.
We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. We sought feedback from the local authority and professionals who work with the service. We used all of this information to plan our inspection.
During the inspection-
We spoke with 19 people who used the service and six relatives about their experience of the care provided. We spoke with 16 members of staff including, care workers, field care workers, senior care workers, care co-ordinators, one of the registered managers and the operations manager.
We reviewed a range of records. This included six people’s care records, including risk assessments and medication records. We looked at three staff files in relation to recruitment, staff supervision and training. We also reviewed a variety of records relating to the oversight and management of the service, including policies and procedures.
Updated
8 April 2020
Westminster Homecare Limited (Milton Keynes) is a domiciliary care service. It is registered to provide personal care to people living in their own homes in the community. The service operates in Milton Keynes, Buckinghamshire and Bedfordshire.
Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also consider any wider social care provided. At the time of our inspection, 131 people were receiving personal care from the service.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People received safe care and were protected against avoidable harm, neglect and discrimination. Risks to people’s safety were assessed and strategies were put in place to reduce the risks.
People received support from staff who had undergone a robust recruitment process. They were supported by regular, consistent staff who knew them and their needs well.
Where the provider took on the responsibility, people's medicines were safely managed. Systems were in place to control and prevent the spread of infection. The provider ensured that lessons were learned when things went wrong, so that improvements could be made to the service and the care people received.
People’s needs, and choices were fully assessed before they received a care package. Staff received an induction and ongoing training that enabled them to have the skills and knowledge to provide effective care.
People were supported to eat and drink enough to maintain their health and well-being.
Staff supported people to live healthier lives and access healthcare services. People could be supported to attend healthcare appointments if it was required.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
Staff had built up good relationships with the people they provided care to. People and relatives, where appropriate, were involved in the planning of their care and support. People using the service, relatives and staff were encouraged to provide feedback which was analysed and acted upon. People's privacy and dignity was always maintained.
Care plans were detailed and supported staff to provide personalised care. There was a complaints procedure in place and systems to deal with complaints effectively. The service was able to offer care to people at the end of their lives, although at the time of inspection no people required end of life care and support.
The service was well managed. There were systems in place to monitor the quality of the service and actions were taken, and improvements were made when required. People said the two registered managers and senior staff team were approachable and provided strong leadership. The service worked in partnership with outside agencies.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection
The last rating for this service was Good (published 16 September 2017).
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received, we may inspect sooner.