We carried out a review of the data available to us about Abel Care Ltd on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Abel Care Ltd, you can give feedback on this service.
Abel Care Ltd 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 people, people with dementia and people with sensory impairment. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. At the time of the inspection there were 7 people using the service.
People's experience of using this service and what we found
People were protected from the risk of abuse because the provider had taken steps to identify the possibility of abuse and prevent abuse from happening. Staff understood their responsibilities to protect people in their care. Individual risks to people had been assessed and recorded in their care plans to keep people safe. Incidents and accidents were documented and reviewed to prevent re-occurrence. People were supported to take their medicines in the way they wanted. Systems were in place for the monitoring and prevention of infection. There were enough staff to meet people’s needs and to provide personalised care and support.
People’s needs were assessed and care and support were planned and delivered in line with their individual care needs. Staff received regular supervision and an annual appraisal. They received a structured induction and training to meet the needs of people they supported. People were assisted to have enough to eat and drink where this was part of their care needs. The registered manager worked closely with health and social care professionals to monitor the health of people.
People and their relatives commented positively about the care and support provided by staff. The provider was committed to challenging any form of discrimination it encountered. People were involved in making choices and decisions about their care. Staff ensured people's privacy and dignity were protected. They had a good understanding around confidentiality.
People received care and support that were tailored to their individual needs. Staff were aware of the needs and preferences of people. Information on how to communicate with people was included in their care plans. The provider had policies and procedures for dealing with any concerns or complaints. People were aware of how to raise issues of concern to the service. Staff had been trained to ensure they had the knowledge and skills to care for people who were approaching the end of their life.
The provider had systems to assess and monitor the delivery of care and support. The registered manager was aware of when the CQC should be made aware of events and the responsibilities of being a registered manager. People and their relatives were encouraged to contact the registered manager if they had any issues and this helped to ensure the service ran smoothly. Staff were clear about their roles and responsibilities and had access to policies and procedures to inform and guide them. The registered manager had good links with a number of health and social care professionals and this helped to ensure people’s needs were fully met.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection and update:
The last rating for this service was requires improvement (17 December 2019) and there were multiple breaches of regulation. The provider completed an action plan after the last inspection to show what they would do and by when to improve. At this inspection enough improvement had been made and the provider was no longer in breach of regulations.
Why we inspected
This inspection was carried out to follow up on action we told the provider to take at the last inspection.
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.
Abel Care Ltd 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 people, people with dementia, people with sensory impairment, people with physical and learning disabilities. At the time of the inspection there were 26 people using the service.
People's experience of using this service and what we found
Risk assessments were not always personalised or updated regularly. Quality assurance measures were not always effective.
People had mixed views on staffing, though we found there were sufficient staff and robust recruitment measures in place. People held mixed views on whether medicines were managed safely, however, we found there were systems in place to ensure it was and staff were trained in, and competency assessed on medicine administration. They were adequate systems and processes in place to safeguard people from abuse. Staff understood infection prevention. Lessons were learnt when there were accidents and incidents.
The registered manager told us the service was in transition following an office move and were attempting to drive improvement at the service following our last inspection. They had made improvements to documentation since our last inspection. Staff told us they held meetings that were beneficial. We viewed compliments of the service and staff were spoken of positively. The registered manager understood their responsibilities and acted with candour when appropriate. There service worked with other agencies to the benefit of the people using the service.
Rating at last inspection and update:
The last rating for this service was requires improvement (published 06 August 2019) and there were multiple breaches of regulation. The provider completed an action plan after the last inspection to show what they would do and by when to improve. At this inspection enough improvement had not been made and the provider was still in breach of regulations.
You can see what action we have asked the provider to take at the end of this full report.
Why we inspected
We received concerns in relation to the management of the service. As a result, we undertook a focused inspection to review the Key Questions of Safe and Well-led only.
We reviewed the information we held about the service. No areas of concern were identified in the other Key Questions. We therefore did not inspect them. Ratings from previous comprehensive inspections for those Key Questions were used in calculating the overall rating at this inspection.
The overall rating for the service has remained the same. 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 Abel Care Ltd on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.
Enforcement
We have identified breaches in relation to managing risks and good governance at this inspection.
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.
Abel Care Ltd is a domiciliary care agency that provides personal care to people living in their own homes,
including older adults and younger disabled adults. 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 the service was supporting 25 people.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
We found that risks to individuals were not always assessed and the service was not analysing accidents and incidents to ensure lessons were learnt. The timeliness of visits was not always reflective of people's preferences.
Systems had been established to safeguard people from the risk of abuse. Medicines were being managed in a safe manner. People were protected from the risk of infection. There were enough staff working at the service and pre-employment checks were carried out on prospective staff.
People were not supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff did not support them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service did not support this practice. Staff were not always provided with ongoing supervisions and an appraisal. We recommended that the service review the support provided to staff to enable them to provide effective care and support to people.
Assessments were undertaken to determine people’s needs before they moved into the service. Staff received training to support them in their roles. People’s nutritional needs were met, and they told us they enjoyed the food. People were supported to access relevant healthcare professionals.
People told us they were treated in a caring manner by staff. Staff understood how to support people in a way that respected their dignity, privacy and independence. People were consulted about the care they received.
The service did not provide information in an accessible format to ensure people knew about the care they were receiving. People were not involved in the creating of or reviewing of their care plans. We recommended that the service ensure people were consulted about their care plans and deliverance of their care package.
People told us they received personalised care and support. Systems had been set up for dealing with complaints and people and their relatives told us they knew how to make a complaint. Staff were trained in end of life care and knew how to provide appropriate support.
We found there were shortfalls in the governance systems that failed to identify the concerns we found during our inspection.
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 22 December 2016). The service is now rated requires improvement.
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
We have found evidence that the provider needs to make improvements. Please see the full report.
You can see what action we have asked the provider to take at the end of this full report.
Enforcement
We have identified breaches in relation to safe care and treatment, the need for consent, person centred care and good governance.
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.
Abel Care provides personal care and support to people in their own homes, within east London. At the time of our inspection, approximately seven people were using the service. The service was employing ten care workers who visited people in the community.
Since the last inspection, the previous registered manager had left the service and a new registered manager was in place. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered care homes, 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.
The new registered manager had made improvements to the service and had made efforts to address the concerns we identified at the last inspection.
Systems were in place to ensure people were protected from the risk of abuse. Staff were aware of the different types of abuse and how to respond. People had their individual risks assessed and staff were aware of the plans to manage the risks.
People received care at home from staff who understood their needs. When required, staff administered people’s medicines and had received the appropriate training to do this.
The provider had sufficient numbers of staff available to provide support to people. Staff had been recruited following appropriate checks with the Disclosure and Barring Service.
Staff received training in a number of topics that were important for them to be able to carry out their roles. They told us that they received support and encouragement from the registered manager and were provided opportunities to develop. Staff were able to raise any concerns and were confident that they would be addressed.
People were treated with privacy and dignity. They were listened to by staff and were involved in making decisions about their care and support. People were supported to meet their nutritional needs and were registered with health care professionals.
People told us they received support from staff who understood their needs and encouraged them to remain as independent as possible. Care plans were person centred and contained details of people’s preferences and choices.
A complaints procedure was in place. People and their relatives were able to make complaints, express their views and give feedback about their care. They told us they could raise any issues and that action would be taken by the registered manager.
The registered manager was committed to developing the service and monitoring the quality of care provided to people. They ensured that regular checks were completed and looked at where improvements could be made.
Abel Care is a domiciliary care service based in Ilford, Essex. The service is registered to provide personal care for people in their own home, within the county of Essex and other London areas. At the time of our inspection, the service provided a service to 20 people, who received personal care and support. The inspection was carried out on 11 November 2015 and was the first inspection since the service registered with the Care Quality Commission in May 2014.
The service had a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered care homes, 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.
We found some significant concerns about the systems that were in place within the service to monitor and manage the recruitment of staff and the care and support of people using the service. These represented a breach of regulations and were areas that required improvement.
People were positive about the service they received but some people were less positive. One person told us they felt safe and were happy with the service. They told us that “they are lovely; I have nothing to complain about”. Another person told us that the care staff “didn’t do much when they came”.
Staff were recruited and supported but some staff started employment without an adequate number of references being received for them. Staff received training and had undergone an induction to support them in their roles but many staff had still to complete all the training modules. Staff spoke positively about their roles and responsibilities and about the people they cared for. However, we did not see evidence that many team meetings had taken place regularly to discuss any issues and share best practice. We also did not see that staff were being supervised regularly through one to one meetings with the registered manager. This meant that staff were not being adequately supported to perform their roles.
The provider had policies and procedures in place relating to safeguarding, whistleblowing, medicines and staffing. Staff had an understanding of medicine handling and care workers’ skills, requirements and levels of competence were supported and monitored through induction and continued training.
Staff knew the people that they supported and provided personalised care. Care plans and risk assessments were reviewed every three to six months and they were carried out with other health professionals. People have a copy of their care plans in their home so that staff were also able to use them to carry out their care and support. There was not a system for the transfer of records from people’s homes to the service office to ensure that all records were complete from the start to the end of the service. Some records in the office were not updated.
Systems had been introduced that monitored the safety and quality of the service and gathered the views of people and their relatives. The service received positive comments and any issues and complaints were dealt with by the registered manager. People told us that they could speak to the registered manager. However, we did not see evidence of complaints being recorded.
Breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulation 2014 were identified. You can see what action we told the provider to take in the full version of the report. Summary of findings