SuffolkHomeCare

Updated 13 September 2018

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.’

This comprehensive inspection was announced and took place on 20 June 2018. We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection visit because the location provides a domiciliary care service and we needed to arrange telephone calls and visits to people using the service. The inspection was carried out by two inspectors, 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 who uses this type of care service.

On 20 June one inspector visited five people using the service in their own homes. Another inspector and the assistant inspector visited the office and spoke with the registered manager and five members of staff. Over the next week the experts by experience spoke with fourteen people and three relatives by telephone to learn about their experiences of the service.

Before the inspection, the provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We reviewed the previous report, information we held about the service and notifications we had been sent. Notifications are changes, events or incidents that providers must tell us about.

We looked at the care records belonging to ten people who used the service. We also looked at other information relation to the management of the service. This included five staff recruitment records, staff training records and supervision and appraisal schedules. We also looked at policies and procedures and records relating to safeguarding, complaints and quality assurance monitoring records.

Updated 13 September 2018

At the last comprehensive inspection of 20 May 2015, the service had an overall rating of ‘Good’. The responsive section of the report was rated as ‘Requires Improvement’. This was because the service could not provide at the time of the inspection a complaints log or sufficient information about raised complaints. The registered manager was on leave and the senior staff were unable to access the complaints log.

At this announced inspection on 20 June 2018, we found the service remained 'Good'. The complaints log we found to be up to date and senior staff were able to access information about complaints. The service was only sending one member of staff to provide care on occasions when two staff were required. Hence the management rating has deteriorated to requires improvement in the well-led section but this does not change the overall rating

This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last comprehensive inspection.

The service provides support to people in their own home. At the time of our inspection the service was supporting 140 people.

People had risk assessments in place to cover any risks that were present within their lives, but also enable them to be as independent as possible. Staff had a good understanding of what safeguarding meant and the procedures for reporting any issues of harm to people. All the staff we spoke with were confident that any concerns they raised would be followed up appropriately by the registered manager. Staffing levels were sufficient to fulfil arranged visits to people and meet their needs other than possibly up to six people that were being reassessed regarding the number of staff needed to support them at each visit. No harm had come to people when one staff member came instead of two staff and we understood in some cases family members had assisted. The staff recruitment procedures ensured that appropriate pre-employment checks were completed to ensure only suitable staff worked at the service.

The processes in place for managing medicines ensured that the administration and handling of medicines was suitable for the people who used the service. Staff were trained in infection control, and supplied with appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) to perform their roles safely. Arrangements were in place for the service to reflect and learn from complaints and incidents to improve safety across the service.

People’s needs were assessed and their care was provided by staff that had received training and were supported in their roles through supervision. Staff supported people with dietary choices when identified to maintain their health and well-being. Staff supported people to attend appointments with healthcare professionals and worked in partnership with other organisations to ensure that people received the required support.

People's consent was sought before any care was provided and the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 were met. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service support this practice

Staff treated people with care and empathy, People were happy with the way that staff provided their care and support. People were listened to, their views were acknowledged and acted upon and care and support was delivered in accordance with their assessed needs and wishes. Records showed that people were involved in the assessment process and their on-going care reviews.

The service worked in partnership with other agencies to ensure quality of care across all levels. People, relatives and staff were encouraged to provide feedback about the service. The registered manager carried out a number of audits and acted upon the feedback to develop the service.