We carried out a review of the data available to us about Oldham Care & Support at Home 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 Oldham Care & Support at Home, you can give feedback on this service.
Oldham Care & Support at Home is registered to provide personal care to people of all ages living in their own homes and when they access the community. 133 people were in receipt of a regulated activity on the day of the inspection.
People’s experience of using this service:
People and relatives told us staff were kind and caring in their approach. People told us staff communicated well with them and acted in an open and transparent way.
Care plans were person-centred and provided staff with the information they needed to provide care and support in a way that met people’s needs and preferences.
Medicines were managed in line with good practice guidance.
Staff assessed risks to people’s health, safety and wellbeing and put plans in place to manage these risks.
People told us they would feel confident to raise any complaints they might have. We saw complaints were identified, investigated and used to improve the service.
There were processes in place to monitor the safety and quality of the service.
The service had a registered manager in post at the time of our inspection.
The management team had excellent knowledge and a wealth of experience to operate the service safely and effectively. They demonstrated an understanding of all aspects of managing the service such as safeguarding procedures and medicines management.
People, relatives and staff were engaged by the service via meetings and questionnaires so that everyone could contribute to the development of the service.
There was a credible strategy in place with plans for multiple new improvements and updates at the service. This was being implemented by the registered manager who was proactive in considering how the service could be improved.
People, staff and relatives spoke positively about the registered manager and senior team who led the service well.
The service met the characteristics of Good in all areas.
More information is in the full report.
Rating at last inspection: At the last inspection the service was rated as Good (22 November 2016).
Why we inspected:
This was a planned inspection to check that this service remained Good.
Follow up:
We did not identify any concerns at this inspection. Going forward we will continue to monitor this service and plan to inspect in line with our reinspection schedule for services rated Good.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Oldham Care and Support At Home is registered to provide personal care to people living in their own homes. People are supported with a variety of tasks including personal support, meal preparation, and supporting people to take their medicine. In addition, the service also manages four extra care schemes where staff are available throughout the day to support people to maintain their independence and assist people who required support with such tasks.
At the time of our inspection, the service was providing support to 153 people, of whom 71 were living in extra care schemes. The service was run from an office in a business park close to the centre of Oldham, with disabled access and adequate parking space.
The service had a registered manager. 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. This service had not been previously inspected by the Care Quality Commission.
People and their relatives told us they felt safe with the staff who provided their care and support.
Staff were aware of their responsibilities in protecting people from harm and knew how to report any concerns about people's safety or wellbeing.
We saw that safe recruitment processes were followed, and staff worked in small teams which helped to maintain consistency of care. People who used the service told us that having the same staff visiting was important to them and made them feel safe. We saw that staff had enough time with people to meet their assessed needs.
Care records identified specific risks to people, and care plans directed staff on how to minimise these risks. Where people required assistance with their medicines we saw that this was given safely by staff who had undertaken medicines competency and refresher training.
People received care and support from staff who had the skills and training to meet their needs.
We saw from training records that all new starters received a thorough induction and ongoing refresher training to maintain their competence. In addition to mandatory training subjects, staff were encouraged to develop their skills and interests with more specialist training provided in specific topics such as Life after a Stroke, and extended dementia training.
The registered manager and the care staff we spoke to demonstrated a good understanding of capacity and consent. Staff sought consent from people before providing support and they were aware of the principles of the Mental Capacity Act People were supported to have enough to eat and drink by staff who understood what support they required. People told us that they were offered choices about what they wanted and that food was prepared the way people preferred.
The service had established good links with healthcare professionals and ensured that people who used the service maintained good access to healthcare.
Staff were kind and caring and we observed that they had a relaxed and comfortable rapport with the people we visited, treating them with dignity and respect and encouraging people to maintain their independence. We saw that care was person centred, and recognised the individuality, culture and values of the people being supported. Care plans were written in a way that ensured the person who used the service was central to the planning of care, and gave people who used the service the opportunity to say how they wanted their care to be provided. People had input into their care plans and these contained details about people's preferences.
The people who used that service were complimentary about the care they received. One person told us, “Everyone is so kind and helpful, nothing is too much trouble. I’d give them 10+.”
The service had good contingency plans to ensure that adverse weather conditions did not affect their care, and ensured that people were not left without the support they required during periods of severe weather.
People who used the service and their relatives were involved in regular reviews about their support and encouraged feedback through surveys and regular spot checks where people had opportunities to talk about the standard of their care.
People who used the service felt that the management of the service was good and told us that they were able to contact someone in the office when they needed to; support was also available out of hours.
There was a system in place to manage complaints, and people were aware how to contact somebody if they wanted to make a complaint.
Staff felt valued in their role, and were encouraged to raise issues with the manager. They received regular supervision and yearly appraisal of performance, and attended team meetings where issues and practice could be discussed. Achievements were recognised, and an ‘employee of the year’ was rewarded at an annual general meeting.
The service had good quality assurance systems and a rolling action plan to drive forward improvement. Information received through audits, complaints, surveys and spot checks was used to identify trends, including good practice and areas for development.