Valor Care Services, Training and Consultancy Limited

Valor Care Services, Training and Consultancy Limited is a domiciliary care agency providing personal care to elderly and disabled people in their own homes. 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 this inspection the service was supporting 44 people.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

People told us they felt safe with care staff and the way they were supported. Staff were trained to deliver care safely and safeguard people from abuse. People’s risks were assessed, and plans were in place to reduce them. There were enough staff available to ensure people did not experience missed care visits and staff followed good hygiene practices.

People’s needs were assessed, and 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 were inducted and supervised, and people were supported to access care services.

People and staff were positive about the management of the service and the provider planned to expand the office-based team. The registered manager sought and acted on feedback. Quality checks were carried out and the provider worked in partnership with others.

The last rating for this service was Requires Improvement (published 8 October 2019). The provider completed an action plan after the last inspection to show what they would do and by when to improve. At this inspection we found improvements had been made and the provider was no longer in breach of regulations. However, we have made a recommendation about auditing staff recruitment records.

Why we inspected

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection of this service on 29 August and 9 September 2021. A breach of legal requirements was found. The provider completed an action plan after the last inspection to show what they would do and by when to improve staffing.

We undertook this focused inspection to check they had followed their action plan and to confirm they now met legal requirements. This report only covers our findings in relation to the Key Questions Safe, Effective and Well-led which contain those requirements. For those key questions not inspected, we used the ratings awarded at the last inspection to calculate the overall rating. The overall rating for the service has changed from Requires Improvement to Good. This is based on the findings at this inspection.

You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Valor Care Services, Training and Consultancy Limited on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk.

Valor Care Services, Training and Consultancy Limited is a domiciliary care agency that provides personal care and support to people living in their own homes. At the time of our inspection 15 older people were using the service.

People’s experience of using this service

People told us they remained happy with the way staff treated them, which was always with respect and dignity. People typically described the staff who provided their personal care as “friendly” and “kind”.

However, although we continued to rate the agency as good for the key questions caring and responsive, we found it was not always safe, effective or well-led. This was because we received mixed feedback from people about staff not always arriving on time for their scheduled visits; staff not being properly checked during their recruitment, or trained and supported thereafter; and, systems to monitor the safety and quality of the service they provided were not always operated effectively.

These negative comments notwithstanding we saw people were cared for and supported by staff who knew how to manage risk. The service had safeguarding procedures in place and staff had a clear understanding of how to keep people safe from abuse and neglect. People received they medicines as they were prescribed. The services arrangements for controlling infection remained effective.

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. Where staff were responsible for this, people were supported to maintain a nutritionally well-balanced diet. People continued to be supported to stay healthy and well and had access to the relevant health care professionals as required.

People were treated equally and had their human rights and diversity respected, including their spiritual and cultural needs and wishes. People were encouraged and supported to develop their independent living skills. Assessments of people’s support needs were carried out before they started using the service.

Care plans were personalised and up to date, which ensured people received personal care that was tailored to meet their individual needs and wishes. Managers and staff understood the Accessible Information Standard and ensured people were given information in a way they could easily understand. People were encouraged to make decisions about the care and support they received and had their choices respected. People were satisfied with the way the provider dealt with their concerns and complaints. People’s end of life care wishes was recorded in their care plans.

People, their relatives and staff all spoke positively about the way the registered manager/owner ran her business. The provider promoted an open and inclusive culture which sought the views of people using the service, their relatives and staff. The provider worked in close partnership with other health and social care professionals and agencies to plan and deliver people’s packages of care and support.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at the last inspection

The last rating for this service was good (published 28 February 2017).

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Enforcement

We have identified a breach in relation to staff training and support. This was because we found staff were not receiving the right amount of training and support they needed to effectively perform their personal care roles and responsibilities. This meant people were at risk of receiving personal care from staff who did not have the right knowledge, skills or support to meet their needs and wishes.

Please see the action we have told the provider to take at the end of this report.

Follow up

We will request an action plan for the provider to understand what they will do to improve the standards of quality and safety. We will work alongside the provider and local authority to monitor progress. We will return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.

At our last comprehensive inspection of this agency in June 2015 we rated the service ‘Requires Improvement’ overall and for the three key questions ‘Is the service safe?’, ‘Is the service effective?’ and ‘Is the service well-led?’ This was because the provider had failed to undertake all the relevant recruitment checks on new staff, ensure staff were always suitably trained and to effectively operate good governance systems.

During our last focused inspection of the service in January 2016 we found the provider had taken appropriate action to improve their staff recruitment, training and management oversight arrangements. However, we continued to rate the service as 'Requires Improvement' overall because we needed to see the provider could consistently maintain these improvements over a more sustained period of time.

At this inspection we found the provider had maintained improvements in the way they managed staff recruitment and training, and their quality monitoring. Overall the service demonstrated they met the regulations and fundamental standards.

The service continued to have a registered manager in post who was also the owner. 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 continued to feel safe with the staff who provided their care and support. There were robust procedures in place to safeguard people from harm and abuse and staff were familiar with how to recognise and report abuse. The provider assessed and managed risks to people’s safety in a way that considered their individual needs. Staff turned up on time for scheduled visits and did all the tasks they were expected to do in the allotted time. The registered manager coordinated the staff rota so people received continuity of care from the same staff who were familiar with their individual needs, routines, preferences and choices. Recruitment procedures were designed to prevent people from being cared for by unsuitable staff. People received their medicines as prescribed and safe medicines management processes were followed.

Staff received appropriate training and support to ensure they had the right knowledge and skills to effectively meet people’s needs. The registered manager monitored staff training to ensure their existing knowledge and skills remained up to date. The registered manager was also in regular contact with her staff team to check they were clear about their duties and responsibilities to the people they cared for. Staff adhered to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 code of practice.

People were supported to eat healthily, where the agency was responsible for this. Staff also took account of people’s food and drink preferences when they prepared meals. People also received the support they needed to stay healthy and to access healthcare services. Staff were knowledgeable about the signs and symptoms to look out for that indicated a person’s health may be deteriorating.

People remained happy with the standard of care and support they received from this domiciliary care agency. People also told us staff were caring and treated them with dignity and respect. People’s privacy was maintained particularly when being supported with their personal care needs. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. When people were nearing the end of their life, they received compassionate and supportive care.

People received personalised support that was responsive to their individual needs. People were involved in planning the care and support they received. Each person had an up to date, personalised care plan, which set out how their specific care and support needs should be met by staff. Staff regularly discussed people’s needs to identify if the level of support they required had changed, and care plans were updated accordingly.

The registered manager continued to provide good leadership and led by example. The service had an open and transparent culture. People felt comfortable raising any issues they might have about the agency. The service had arrangements in place to deal with people’s concerns and complaints appropriately. The provider also routinely gathered feedback from people using the service, their relatives and staff. This feedback alongside the provider’s own audits and quality checks was used to continually assess, monitor and improve the quality of the service they provided. Staff felt supported by the registered manager, as well as valued for the work they did for the agency.

After that inspection, the provider wrote to us to say what they would do to meet legal requirements in relation to these breaches. We undertook this announced inspection on 19 January 2016 to check the provider had followed their action plan and now met legal requirements. We told the provider two days before our visit that we would be coming to ensure they would be available.

This report only covers our findings in relation to this topic. You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the 'all reports' link for ‘Valor & SFTK Care Services Ltd’ on our website at www.cqc.org.uk’

Valor & SFTK Care Services Ltd is a domiciliary care agency that provides personal care and support to people living in their own homes. The agency specialises in the care and support of older people who have been discharged from hospital. They work closely with NHS continuing care teams from the London Boroughs of Sutton and Merton. There were 10 people receiving a domiciliary care service from the agency when we inspected them.

The service had a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have a legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

During our focused inspection, we found that the registered provider had followed their action plan, which they had said would be implemented by October 2015. We saw legal requirements had been met because the provider had improved its arrangements for recruiting and training staff and good governance. This meant relevant employment checks were carried out on new staff, existing staff were appropriate trained, and the quality and safety of the care and support people using the service received was routinely monitored by the provider.