Archived: Availl - Bradford

Updated 13 April 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.’

The inspection was prompted in part by concerns the local authority had about the service following a visit in November 2017. The information shared with CQC indicated potential concerns about the documentation and how management systems and processes were operated.

The inspection took place between 5 and 9 March 2018 and was announced. We gave the provider a short amount of notice that we would be visited the office, because it is small and the manager is often out of the office supporting staff or meeting people who use the service. We needed to be sure that they would be in. On 5 and 6 March 2018 we made phone calls to people and their relatives to ask them about the quality of care they received. On the 6 March 2018 we visited the provider’s offices to look at care related documentation and speak with the manager of the service. Between 7 and 9 March 2018 we telephoned care workers.

The inspection was carried out by one inspector and an Expert 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 in this case the care of older people.

Prior to the inspection we spoke with both the local authority commissioning and safeguarding teams. We reviewed information held on the provider for example notifications sent to us by the provider.

During the inspection we spoke with three people who used the service and six relatives. We spoke with five care workers, the manager, the provider, a director and the admin support. We looked at three people’s care records and records relating to the management of the service including staff training records, audits and meeting minutes.

Updated 13 April 2018

The inspection took place between 5 and 9 March 2018 and was announced.

Availl - Bradford 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 both older adults and, younger disabled adults. At the time of the inspection 18 people were receiving personal care from the service.

A registered manager was not in place. 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. A new manager had been in post since October 2017 and was going through the application process to be registered with the Commission.

At the last inspection in December 2016 we rated the provider as ‘Good’ overall and ‘Good’ in each of the individual domains. At this inspection we found the provider had maintained its overall ‘Good’ rating although we identified some minor concerns with the way systems and processes were operated. As a result we rated the ‘Is the service Well Led?’ domain as ’Requires Improvement.’

People provided positive feedback about the care and support they received from Availl. They said they received effective and appropriate care and that staff were kind and compassionate.

People said they felt safe in the company of staff. Systems and processes were in place to help protect people from abuse. Risks to people’s health and safety were assessed and risk assessment documents guided staff to help protect people from harm. The service learned from adverse events to improve the safety of the service.

Overall medicines were managed safely. People received their medicines when they needed them and documentation was kept to record this.

There were enough staff deployed to ensure people received consistently and timely care. Staff were able to arrive on time and stay with people for the allocated amount of time. Safe recruitment procedures were followed to help ensure staff were of suitable character to work with vulnerable people. Staff received a range of training which was relevant to their role.

The service was compliant with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). People’s consent was sought before care and support was offered.

The service worked in partnership with other agencies including health professionals to help ensure people’s needs were met. People’s healthcare needs were assessed and plans of care put in place.

People said staff were kind and caring and treated them well. We saw good positive relationships had developed between people and staff. People received care from a small staff team to enable familiarity between people and staff.

People’s care needs were assessed and clear and detailed plans of care put in place. People said care needs were met and records confirmed this.

People were encouraged to provide feedback and raise any concerns or complaints they had. We saw complaints were dealt with appropriately by the service.

There was a good, person centred culture within the organisation with management and staff committed to providing personalised care and support. People and relatives spoke very highly about the overall quality of the service.

Documentation relating to some aspects of people’s care and support and the management of the service needed improving to consistently evidence that safe systems and processes were being followed. However we did not identify this had an impact on people who used the service and were confident the new management team would address the minor issues raised.