We carried out a review of the data available to us about Westminster Homecare (Cambridge) 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 Westminster Homecare (Cambridge), you can give feedback on this service.
Westminster Homecare (Cambridge) is a domiciliary care agency providing personal care to 152 people. This service is provided to younger adults and older people with a range of support needs and health conditions. Including people living with dementia.
Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also consider any wider social care provided.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
Sufficient staff with the right skills, supported people to be safe. Staff implemented their knowledge of safeguarding systems well. Staff were recruited safely. Most risks were identified and managed well. One person told us, "[Staff] lift me in the hoist and sling. They always do it safely and there are always two staff." Lessons were learned when things went wrong.
People's assessed needs were met by staff whose training and support had given them the required skills. The provider worked well with others involved in people's care. People ate and drank enough. Staff enabled people to access health care and support services. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported support this practice.
Staff provided people with kind, compassionate and thoughtful care. People's privacy and dignity was upheld. People who needed support from an advocate were given information how to access this. People had a say in developing their care and how it was provided.
People's care was person centred and staff enabled people to take part in pastimes, hobbies and activities people were interested in. People's complaints were responded to in line with the provider's policies and to the person's satisfaction. Systems and procedures were in place to support people with end of life care and in a dignified way.
The registered manager understood their responsibilities. Audits and quality assurance processes were effective in identifying and driving improvements. Staff received stable and consistent support and leadership for their role. People, relatives and staff had a say in how the service was run. The provided worked well with others to provide people with joined up care.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection
The last rating for this service was good (published 17 July 2017).
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.
This unannounced comprehensive inspection took place on 21 and 23 June 2017. It was undertaken by one inspector and an expert by experience who had experience of caring for people who use this type of service and. At the previous inspection in 2 and 4 June 2015 the service was rated as ‘Good’. At this inspection we found that the service had remained ‘Good’.
A registered manager was in post at the time of the inspection. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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.
Staff understood, from their training about safeguarding, how to protect and keep people safe from any potential harm. Accidents and incidents were identified and acted upon when required such as those to help prevent a late care call.
Risks to people that staff needed to be aware of such as moving and handling, falls and skin integrity had been appropriately managed. This reduced the potential of harm occurring.
People’s assessed care needs were met by staff who possessed the right skills and knowledge. A sufficient number of staff who had been recruited in a safe way were deployed to meet people’s assessed needs.
Only those staff who had been trained to the required standard were assessed before being deemed competent to safely administer people's prescribed medicines. People’s medicines were managed safely.
Staff were provided with the training and support they required in order for them to meet people's care needs. People were supported and enabled to access healthcare services when they needed. People had the nutritional support they needed.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. This meant that should any person lack mental capacity that their rights would be protected.
Staff’s used their care skills and made a difference on each occasion that care was provided. This was in providing care that was very kind, very compassionate and creative in overcoming everyday obstacles people faced.
People, their relatives or legal representative were enabled to be involved in identifying, determining and planning the review of their care.
People were supported to maintain the skills they possessed and staff encouraged people to become more independent.
People's concerns were responded to in line with the provider’s policies. Effective actions were taken to help prevent the potential for any recurrence.
Staff were supported in their role with regular meetings, shadowing experienced staff and formal supervision. As a result of this staff were able to fulfil their role effectively.
The registered manager understood their responsibilities in supporting their staff team, notifying the CQC about important events that, by law, they are required to do.
People, their relatives or representative and staff were involved and enabled to make suggestions to improve how the service was run. An effective quality monitoring and audit system was in place to identify and make changes in the way the service was run.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.
Westminster Homecare (Cambridge) is registered to provide personal care for people living in their own homes. The service is provided to people in and around the city of Cambridge and towns of Huntingdon, St Ives and surrounding villages. The service provides personal care for approximately 130 people.
This unannounced inspection took place on 02 and 04 June 2015.
This was the first inspection of this service.
The service had a registered manager in post. They had been a registered manager since September 2014. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to manage the service. Like registered managers, 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.
The provider ensured that only suitable and qualified staff were offered permanent employment at the service. This was through a robust recruitment process. There were a sufficient number of suitably experienced staff. An induction process was in place to support and develop new staff.
Staff had their competence regularly assessed to ensure they safely administered people’s medicines. Staff were trained in medicines administration and protecting people from harm. Staff had a good understanding of what protecting people from harm meant and how to report any safeguarding incidents and concerns.
The CQC is required by law to monitor the operation of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and to report on what we find. We found that the registered manager and staff were knowledgeable about when a request through the Court of Protection for a DoLS would be required. We found that no applications to lawfully deprive people of their liberty were required but the registered manager and staff were very knowledgeable about when and what action to take if this was required. People’s ability to make decisions based on their best interests had been clearly documented to demonstrate the specific things people could make decisions about.
People’s care was provided by staff who always respected their privacy and dignity. People were provided with care that was compassionate, caring and supportive of their choices and preferences. People were informed if there were changes to care staff and visit timings.
People’s care records were kept up-to-date, with the information and guidance staff required and were easy to follow. People were involved as much as possible in their care planning and were supported by advocates or relatives when this was necessary.
People were supported to access a range of health care professionals including community nurses or their GP if they wished or if staff identified a need. Prompt action was taken in response to the people’s changing health care needs. Risks to people’s health were managed in response to each person’s assessed risks and needs.
People were supported to have sufficient quantities of the food and drinks they preferred and staff encouraged people to eat healthily. People were supported with a diet which was appropriate for their needs including soft food diets to ensure they remained safe with their eating and drinking. Health care professional advice was followed and adhered to.
Information, guidance and advice was provided to people, family members or their relatives on how to raise a concern or make compliments. Staff knew how to respond to any reported concerns or suggestions. Effective action was taken to address people’s concerns and to reduce the risk of any potential recurrence.
The provider and registered manager had audits and quality assurance processes and procedures in place. Staff were supported to develop their skills, increase their knowledge and obtain additional care related qualifications. Information gathered and analysed was used to drive improvement in the service provided.