Onduty 24 Limited

Onduty 24 is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats. The agency supports 13 people. Not everyone using Onduty 24 received personal care. At the time of our inspection, seven people were receiving personal care.

People’s experience of using this service:

People who received care from Onduty 24 told us they felt safe and supported by staff who visited them.

People and relatives told us staff were kind and caring. They used words to describe staff such as , “Lovely”, “respectful”, “nice”, “gentle” and that staff were “really caring and [were] very good.”

Most staff received appropriate training and support to enable them to perform their roles effectively. The manager will ensure all staff complete the necessary training as soon as possible.

The provider had effective safeguarding and whistleblowing systems and policies in place and staff were aware of how to recognise signs of abuse and were knowledgeable about what to do in the event of any concern being raised.

Risks associated with people’s care needs were managed safely and reviewed regularly.

People's care was personalised to their individual needs. There was sufficient detail in people's care plans that enabled staff to provide responsive care.

Care plans were developed with people and relatives to ensure they were person centred and tailored to peoples’ needs and routines.

People received appropriate support with their medicines.

People were supported to access healthcare professionals appropriately.

Management and staff demonstrated a good understanding of and responded to people's diverse needs.

Staff demonstrated their understanding of the Mental Capacity Act, 2005.

Staff gained people’s consent before providing personal care and support.

Rating at last inspection:

At the last inspection the service was rated Good. (report published 16 November 2016)

Why we inspected:

This was a planned inspection.

Follow up:

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

Onduty 24 Limited is registered to provide personal care and support for people living within their own homes. At the time of our inspection there were six people using the service, all of whom resided within Northamptonshire. People's packages of care varied dependent upon their needs. There were 9 staff employed who provided people’s care.

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 was our first inspection of the service since they registered with us.

People’s safety and welfare was promoted by staff that understood and had received training on their role in protecting people from potential harm and abuse. Safety and welfare was further promoted through the assessment and on-going review of potential risks to people. Where risks had been identified measures had been put into place to reduce their likelihood, which were recorded within people’s records and understood and implemented by staff.

Staff upon their recruitment had their application and references validated and were checked as to their suitability to work with people, which enabled the provider to make an informed decision as to their employment. Staff underwent a period of induction and training. Training provided to staff and staff understanding of their role and responsibilities meant people were supported appropriately with all aspects of their care, which included support with their medicines.

Staff understood people’s needs and were committed to providing care and support that promoted their independence. Staff understood the importance of seeking people’s consent prior to providing care and support. Staff were aware of people’s rights to make decisions and were able to tell us how they encouraged people to express their opinions on their care and support.

Family members were complimentary about the approach of staff in the delivery of care and support. However some told us communication between themselves and staff based within the office could be improved. For example, they had requested they be provided with information as to which staff would be providing care on a weekly basis, we found this was not being routinely provided. Family members told us privacy and dignity was understood and recognised by staff and that the approach and caring attitude of staff had a positive impact.

People’s records included a signed agreement by them for their information to be shared with named agencies and organisation. The agreements detailed the circumstances in which information would be shared and the provider’s commitment to record and retain information safely and securely.

The provider had managed complaints consistent with their policy and procedure. A complaint related to a ‘missed call’ (staff did not arrive at a person’s home to provider their care). The provider used this information along with information gathered through the sending out of quality assurance questionnaires to gain the views of people using the service. This information had been used by the provider to develop an action plan to bring about improvement. When we spoke with a family member we found they had recently experienced a missed call. This showed that measures identified within the action plan to bring about improvement were not always robust or reviewed to ensure people received a high quality service.