Angel Care Services UK HQ and Support services

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

We expect health and social care providers to guarantee people with a learning disability and autistic people respect, equality, dignity, choices and independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ is the guidance CQC follows to make assessments and judgements about services supporting people with a learning disability and autistic people and providers must have regard to it.

Right Support:

The provider ensured risks were assessed and mitigated effectively; medicines were managed safely. Audits in place were robust enough to identify and address any ongoing issues.The ethos, values, attitudes and behaviours of leaders and care staff ensured people lead confident, inclusive, and empowered lives. Staffing levels were sufficient to meet people's needs and managers recruited staff safely. Staff followed an induction programme, and training was on-going throughout employment.

Staff thoroughly assessed people's needs before commencing a package of care. Care plans included information about support required in areas such as nutrition, mobility, and personal care to help inform care provision. Staff made appropriate referrals to other agencies and professionals when required.

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 this practice. People were supported by staff to pursue their interests and staff supported them to achieve their aspirations and goals.

Right Care:

Care was person-centred and promoted people’s dignity, privacy, and human rights. Staff promoted equality and diversity in their support for people and understood people’s cultural needs and provided culturally appropriate care. People received kind and compassionate care. Staff protected and respected people’s privacy and dignity and understood and responded to their individual needs. Staff understood how to protect people from poor care and abuse. Staff had training on how to recognise and report abuse and they knew how to apply it. The provider worked well with other agencies.

People’s care plans reflected their range of needs, and this promoted their wellbeing. People told us they were well treated, and their equality and diversity were respected. People felt staff considered their views when agreeing on the support required. Staff identified people's communication needs and addressed these with appropriate actions.

Right Culture:

People led inclusive and empowered lives because of the ethos, values, attitudes and behaviours of the management and staff. Staff knew and understood people well and were responsive to people’s needs. People received consistent care from staff who knew them well.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection and update

The last rating for this service was good (published 31 May 2017).

Why we inspected

This inspection was prompted by a review of the information we held about this service. For those key questions not inspected, we used the ratings awarded at the last inspection to calculate the overall rating.

You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Angel Care Services UK HQ and Support services on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.

Angel Care Services is registered to provide personal care to people living in their own homes. People are supported with a variety of tasks including personal support, meal preparation, and supporting people to take their medicine.

At the time of our inspection, the service was providing support to four people who all lived in the Stretford and Urmston areas of Greater Manchester. The service was run from an office in Longsight, Manchester.

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 service had not been previously inspected by the Care Quality Commission.

When we spoke with people who used the service they told us they felt secure with the care workers who provided their care and support. We saw that there were good systems in place for the safe recruitment of staff, and the care workers we spoke with were aware of their responsibilities in protecting people from harm, and knew how to report any concerns about people's safety or wellbeing.

People told us the staff responded to their needs and provided care in the way they wanted it to be provided. Having a small and dedicated staff team meant that people who used the service had the same group of staff for all visits which was important to them and made them feel safe. Staff told us that they had enough time with people to meet their assessed needs.

Care records identified risks to people, and care plans directed staff on how to minimise these risks. Where people required assistance with their medicines we saw that this was given safely by staff who had undertaken medicines competency training.

People received care and support from staff who had the skills and training to meet their needs. We saw from training records that new starters received a thorough induction and ongoing training was provided to ensure staff were able to carry out their duties. Staff told us that they were well managed and received good instruction, but we saw that formal supervision was not provided in line with the service’s stated policies, and there was no system in place to provide an annual appraisal of staff performance.

People who used the service had agreed to the delivery of their care, and signed to consent to this. They told us that staff always offered and respected their choices, but would be attentive to their needs, such as dietary requirements or medical needs.

The service had established good links with healthcare professionals and ensured that people who used the service maintained good access to healthcare.

Staff were kind and caring, and people who used the service told us that they were treated with dignity and respect. We saw that care was person- centred, and recognised the individuality, culture and values of the people being supported. Care plans were written in a way that ensured the person who used the service was central to the planning of care, and gave people who used the service the opportunity to say how they wanted their care to be provided. Well written daily notes reflected changes and issues which were picked up by the next member of staff on duty.

The people who used the service were complimentary about the care they received. One told us, “Angel Care is marvellous, the carers are excellent. There is lots I can’t do but the girls will do everything I ask”.

People told us that they were happy with their care, but knew how to complain if they were not, and we saw that there were systems in place to investigate any complaints or concerns raised about the service. They told us that they were able to contact someone in the office when they needed to; support was also available out of hours. They told us that they were contacted daily by the manager or deputy manager who checked their welfare.

The service had good quality assurance systems in place to manage, audit and review all aspects of the service. Surveys and regular spot checks were used to identify trends, including good practice and areas for development.