Background to this inspection
Updated
15 January 2016
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 took place on 3 December 2015 and was announced. The provider was given 48 hours’ notice because the location provides a domiciliary care service. This was in line with CQC guidance.
The inspection team consisted of an adult social care 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.
We reviewed the information we held about the service before we carried out the visit. We looked at the notifications and other information the Care Quality Commission had received about the service.
During the inspection we spoke with the registered manager, the training manager and the Human Resources administrator. We spoke with one staff member on the telephone to discuss their experience working for Attention2Care. We reviewed a range of records which included five care records for people who used the service, five staff recruitment records, staff induction, training and supervision, medication records, the provider’s policies and procedures, safety and quality audits and records related to the overall management of the service.
After the inspection we spoke with 10 people who received care from the service and one relative by telephone to gather their views on the service they received.
Updated
15 January 2016
The inspection took place on 3 December 2015 and was announced. This was in line with CQC’s guidance for domiciliary care agencies.
Attention2Care Limited provides personal care and support to people in their own homes in the Sefton area of Merseyside. The service had 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. At the time of the inspection the agency was supporting approximately 65 people in the Sefton area.
People who used the services of the agency told us they felt safe when receiving care and support. This included support with personal care, help with meals and also with medication.
Staff understood how to recognise abuse and how to report concerns or allegations. There were processes in place to help make sure people were protected from the risk of abuse.
Risk assessments and support plans had been completed to protect people from the risk of harm. Assessments had been completed for everyone who was receiving a service to help ensure people’s needs were met. Risk management plans were implemented and followed by staff to help ensure people received safe and effective care.
People told us care staff supported them with their medication at a time when they needed to take it. They said this was in accordance with their wishes and needs. Medication was recorded correctly. The medication administration records we viewed were clearly presented to show the treatment people had received. Medicines were safely administered by suitably trained staff.
Staff had been recruited safely to ensure they were suitable to work with vulnerable people. We found Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks had been carried out prior to new members of staff working. DBS checks consist of background checks on people’s criminal record and a check to see if they have been placed on a list for people who are barred from working with vulnerable adults. This assists employers to make safer decisions about the recruitment of staff.
Care staff had training and support through induction, a programme of training, supervision and appraisal.
Staffing levels were determined by the number of people using the service and their individual needs. Most people told us that they received care from a regular team which they felt was very important.
People‘s care needs were assessed. The care records we looked at showed that a range of assessments had been completed depending on people’s individual needs. Records were regularly reviewed which helped to ensure the information written in them was current. Support plans had been completed to guide staff as to what people required and what they could do for themselves. People’s care needs were recorded in a plan of care in an individual care file. The care plans recorded details around people’s routines, preferences and level of care and support they required. This helped to enable staff to support people to meet their individual needs. With regards to people making their own decisions, people we spoke with informed us they were able to do so and were involved as much as possible regarding decisions about their welfare.
Most of the people who used the services of the agency were complimentary regarding staff; they told us all staff were kind and considerate and that they were treated with dignity.
Staff understood what people’s care needs were. Staff supported people’s independence in their home.
A complaints procedure was in place and details of how to make a complaint had been provided to people who used the service. People we spoke with knew how to raise a complaint.
People who used the services of the agency were able to provide feedback about the quality of the service.
Systems were in place to monitor the quality of the service provided. This included audits (checks) on areas such as, care documents, medicine administration and also meetings with people to ensure they were happy with the care provided.