• Services in your home
  • Homecare service

Archived: Bicester Innovation Centre

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Commerce House, Telford Road, Bicester, Oxfordshire, OX26 4LD 07741 207713

Provided and run by:
Bicester PA and Care LLP

Important: The provider of this service changed. See new profile

All Inspections

9 November 2017

During a routine inspection

We undertook an announced inspection of Bicester PA and Care LPP on 9 November 2017.

Bicester PA and Care LPP is a domiciliary care service providing personal care for people in their own homes in Bicester, Oxfordshire and the surrounding area. At the time of our inspection 26 people were being supported by the service.

There was 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 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.

We were greeted warmly by staff at the service. The atmosphere was open and friendly.

People told us they benefitted from caring relationships with the staff. There were sufficient staff to meet people’s needs and people received their care when they expected. Staffing levels and visit schedules were consistently maintained. The service had safe, robust recruitment processes.

People were safe. Staff understood their responsibilities in relation to safeguarding. Staff had received regular training to make sure they stayed up to date with recognising and reporting safety concerns. The service had systems in place to notify the appropriate authorities where concerns were identified.

Where risks to people had been identified risk assessments were in place and action had been taken to manage the risks. Staff were aware of people’s needs and followed guidance to keep them safe. People received their medicine as prescribed.

Staff had a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and applied its principles in their work. The MCA protects the rights of people who may not be able to make particular decisions themselves. The registered manager was knowledgeable about the MCA and how to ensure the rights of people who lacked capacity were protected.

People were treated as individuals by staff committed to respecting people’s individual preferences. The service’s diversity policy supported this culture. Care plans were person centred and people had been actively involved in developing their support plans.

People told us they were confident they would be listened to and action would be taken if they raised a concern. We saw a complaints policy and procedure was in place. The service had systems to assess the quality of the service provided. Learning was identified and action taken to make improvements which improved people’s safety and quality of life. Systems were in place that ensured people were protected against the risks of unsafe or inappropriate care.

Staff spoke positively about the support they received from the registered manager. Staff supervision and meetings were scheduled as were annual appraisals. Staff told us the registered manager was approachable and there was a good level of communication within the service.

People told us the service was friendly, responsive and well managed. People knew the managers and staff and spoke positively about them. The service sought people’s views and opinions and acted upon them.

15 October 2015

During a routine inspection

We undertook an announced inspection of Bicester PA and Care LLP Domiciliary Care Agency (DCA) on 15 October 2015. This is a new service, first registered with the Care Quality commission (CQC) on 23 March 2015. Bicester PA and Care LLP provide personal care services to people in their own homes. At the time of our inspection eight people were receiving a service.

There was 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 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.

People told us they benefitted from caring relationships with the staff. One person said “The care I get is excellent. Nothing is too much trouble for the carers. They always ask if they can do more”. There were sufficient staff to meet people’s needs and people received their care when they expected.

People were safe. Staff understood their responsibilities in relation to safeguarding. Staff had received regular training to make sure they stayed up to date with recognising and reporting safety concerns. The service had systems in place to notify the appropriate authorities where concerns were identified.

Where risks to people had been identified, risk assessments were in place and action had been taken to reduce the risks. Staff were aware of people’s needs and followed guidance to keep them safe. People received their medicine as prescribed.

Staff had a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and applied its principles in their work. The MCA protects the rights of people who may not be able to make particular decisions themselves. The registered manager was knowledgeable about the MCA and how to ensure the rights of people who lacked capacity were protected.

People told us they were confident they would be listened to and action would be taken. One person said “They certainly know what I like and do everything to make sure I am happy”. The service had systems to assess the quality of the service provided. Learning was identified and action taken to make improvements which improved people’s safety and quality of life. Systems were in place that ensured people were protected against the risks of unsafe or inappropriate care.

The registered manager had a clear vision for the service that was displayed on their website and its sentiments were echoed by staff.

Staff spoke positively about the support they received from the registered manager. Staff supervision meetings were scheduled as were annual appraisals. Staff told us the registered manager was approachable and there was a good level of communication within the service.

People told us the service was friendly, responsive and well managed. People knew the registered manager and staff and spoke positively about them. The service sought people’s views and opinions and acted upon them.