You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 9 February 2018

We inspected the service on 8 and 15 January 2018. Hills Angels Homecare is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats. It provides a service to older adults and younger disabled adults. Not everyone using this service receives regulated activity; CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also take into account any wider social care provided.

This announced inspection was carried out by one inspector and an expert by experience. The expert by experience had knowledge of care services including domiciliary services.

There was a registered manager in the service. 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 our previous inspection in January 2016 we rated the service as ‘Requires Improvement’ as information to ensure people received their medicines at the right time and for the right reason was not always available. Systems were not in place to ensure action was taken where records identified medicines may not have been given. Where risks to people’s health and welfare had been identified, information to minimise these risks was not available. The registered manager assessed how well the service was running to identify if any improvements were needed, however these systems had not identified concerns with how medicines and risks were managed. On this inspection we found improvements had been made and the service was now rated as Good.

Risks to people’s health and wellbeing were assessed and plans were in place to monitor how people were supported and to assist them in a safe manner. The staff understood how to protect people from harm and were confident that any concerns would be reported and investigated. Some people received assistance to take medicines and records were kept to ensure that this was done safely. There were safe recruitment procedures in place to ensure new staff were suitable to work with people.

Staff were trained to ensure that they had the skills to support people effectively. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff support them in the least restrictive way possible. People were able to make decisions about how they wanted to receive support to ensure their health needs were met. When people required assistance to eat and drink, the registered manager ensured that this was planned to meet their preferences and assessed need.

People had a small team of staff who provided their support and had caring relationships with them. Care was planned and reviewed with people to ensure their choices were followed. People’s privacy and dignity were respected and upheld by the staff.

People had care records that included information about how they wanted their care and this was reviewed to reflect any changing needs. There was a complaints procedure in place and any concern received were investigated and responded to in line with this policy.

People were asked for their feedback on the quality of the service and their contribution supported the development of the service. Quality assurance systems were in place to identify where improvements could be made and the registered manager worked with other organisations to share ideas and to develop the service. The manager promoted an open culture which put people at the heart of the service.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 9 February 2018

The service was safe.

Staffing was suitable to ensure that people received the support they needed at a time they needed it. Staff knew how to protect people from abuse and knew what to do if they suspected it had taken place. People received their medicines as prescribed and infection control standards were maintained. Recruitment systems were in place to ensure staff were suitable to work within the home.

Effective

Good

Updated 9 February 2018

The service was effective.

People had capacity to make decisions about their care and staff sought people�s consent when providing support. Staff knew people well and had completed training so they could provide the support people wanted. Where the agreed support included help at meal times, this was provided and food was prepared for people. People had responsibility for their health care and supported by staff where this was needed to attend appointments.

Caring

Good

Updated 9 February 2018

The service was caring.

People felt well cared for, their privacy was respected, and they were treated with dignity and respect by kind and friendly staff. Staff knew the care and support needs of people well and took an interest in people and their families to provide individual personal care.

Responsive

Good

Updated 9 February 2018

The service was responsive.

Care plans were in place to ensure people received care which was personalised to meet their needs. Where care needs changed, the support was reviewed to match what people wanted. Comments were monitored and complaints acted upon.

Well-led

Good

Updated 9 February 2018

The service was well-led.

Systems were in place to assess and monitor the quality of care and to identify where improvements could be made. Staff were supported in their role and felt able to comment on the quality of service and raise any concerns. The quality of service people received was regularly monitored through feedback from people.