You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 1 June 2018

We carried out the inspection on 11 April 2018 and it was announced.

Albury Care Limited is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats in the community. It provides a service to older adults, younger disabled adults and children.

At the time of the inspection, 62 people were using the service.

The provider was given 48 hours’ notice because the location provides a domiciliary care service and we needed to be sure that someone would be in.

This was a comprehensive inspection to see what improvements the provider had made to ensure they met regulatory requirements.

At our last comprehensive inspection on 8 November 2016, the service was in breach of two regulations related to quality monitoring and staff training. We rated the service as requiring improvement. We had found that care records lacked detail and were not reviewed regularly. In addition, monitoring systems to manage complaints, incidents and accidents were ineffective. We also found that staff had not completed the provider's mandatory training and refresher courses.

At this inspection, we found improvements made ensured people received effective care. Care plans showed sufficient detail about people’s needs and the support they required. The quality of care underwent checks and monitoring to identify and resolve concerns about people’s safety.

There was a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the CQC 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 had an assessment of their needs and preferences about care delivery. Staff were aware of risks to people’s health and safety and knew how to support them safely. People received the support they required with their nutrition and hydration and to maintain their health. Enough suitably recruited staff were deployed to meet people’s needs. Staff administered and managed people’s medicines in line with the provider’s procedures. Staff knew how to prevent and control the risk of infection.

Staff provided care in line with best practice guidance and the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). People received care from staff who received an induction, training and supervision to enable them to deliver care effectively.

People received care that met their individual needs in line with their preferences. Staff treated people with respect and maintained their dignity and privacy.

People using the service and their relatives knew how to raise concerns and make a complaint about care delivery if they needed to.

People enjoyed a person centred approach to their care and support. Staff were supported in their roles and had access to guidance from the registered manager and the management team.

An open and honest culture existed at the service about care delivery. The quality of the service underwent regular monitoring to improve the care and support provided to people. The registered manager worked closely with other agencies to provide effective care.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 1 June 2018

The service was safe. People received support in a manner that managed risks to their health and well-being. Staff knew how to protect people from the risk of abuse.

Staff managed and administered people�s medicines safely. People received support from experienced and suitably recruited staff.

People�s care delivery minimised the risk of infection.

Effective

Good

Updated 1 June 2018

The service was effective. People�s care delivery was based on best practice guidance. People received care from staff who had the support, training and supervision required to deliver appropriate care.

Staff obtained people�s consent to care and support. People were supported in line with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA).

People had the support they required with nutrition and hydration and to maintain good health.

Caring

Good

Updated 1 June 2018

The service was caring. Staff treated people with kindness and compassion.

People enjoyed positive caring relationships with the staff who provided their care. Staff respected people�s dignity and privacy.

People received information about their care in a format they understood. People using the service and their relatives took part in planning their care and support.

Responsive

Good

Updated 1 June 2018

The service was responsive. People received care that responded to changes to their individual needs. People had their needs met in a manner they preferred.

Staff supported people to be independent and to take part in activities of their choosing.

People had opportunities to share their views about the service.

People using the service and their relatives had information about how to make a complaint when needed.

Well-led

Good

Updated 1 June 2018

The service was well led. People and staff knew the registered manager and were happy with how the service was managed.

There was a transparent culture on how staff delivered care.

The registered manager carried out audits about care delivery and made the necessary improvements.

People�s care provision improved because of the involvement of other agencies.