We carried out a review of the data available to us about Home Instead Senior Care 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 Home Instead Senior Care, you can give feedback on this service.
People’s experience of using this service:
People told us they could not think of any way to improve the service and that it was well-led.
There was an open and transparent culture at the service which was built on positive values, mutual respect and a drive to improve.
Staff took pride in enabling people to stay in their own homes the management team that actively promoted team working and improvement.
The registered provider provided learning resources and best practice information to members of the public. They told us they were passionate about helping people and relatives to live well.
People told us they knew the staff who supported them and they received support when they needed this.
Medicines were managed safely. People were supported to receive their medicines when they needed them.
People were asked to consent to their care and their rights were protected. There were arrangements to ensure people’s mental capacity was assessed if this was required.
People told us they were supported to access medical advice if this was needed.
People said they were involved in developing their care plans. Care records we reviewed reflected this.
People told us they were supported to ensure their nutritional needs were met. Care records documented the support people required.
People were enabled express their views on their experiences of receiving care and support. Changes were made in response to people’s feedback when possible.
People were supported to follow their own interests and pursuits by staff who knew them well and recognised people’s individuality.
Safe recruitment procedures were used and staff told us they received training and supervision to enable them to fulfil their role.
People told us they felt safe with staff and staff told us they would report concerns of abuse or avoidable harm to the registered manager and local safeguarding authorities to protect people.
Rating at last inspection: Good (14 September 2016)
Why we inspected: All services rated as good are re-inspected within 30 months of the Care Quality Commission report being published. This inspection was part of our scheduled plan of visiting services to check the safety and quality of care people received and to check the service remained good.
Follow up: The next scheduled inspection will be in keeping with the overall rating. We will continue to monitor information we receive from and about the service. We may inspect sooner if we receive concerning information about the service.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Home Instead provides personal care assistance for people who live in their own homes. The service supports people who may live with mental health conditions, dementia or a learning disability. The office is based in a commercial park on the outskirts of Blackpool.
A registered manager was in place. 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.
At the last inspection on 27 May 2014, we found the provider was meeting the requirements of the regulations.
During this inspection, staff, people and their relatives told us they felt the leadership and management of Home Instead was good. The registered manager had systems to check quality assurance, such as a number of feedback and monitoring systems. Staff and people who accessed the service told us they felt valued and a part of the ongoing development of the service. The provider had worked with a number of external agencies and within the local community to establish areas of good practice.
We found the management team invested in their staff, through training and support, and celebrated their achievements. The provider and a staff member both won national awards for demonstrating a caring approach. People said Home Instead was well run and they could contact the office if they had any concerns. The registered manager had a range of audits and monitoring systems to maintain their safety and wellbeing.
The management team were innovative in their approach to training and supporting staff. For example, they developed and implemented a bespoke qualification with the local college. People said there was consistency of staff who met their care packages at agreed times. One person told us, “They are always on time.” The registered manager had effective recruitment systems to protect people from unsuitable staff.
People said they felt safe when staff supported them as part of their care packages. When we discussed safeguarding procedures with staff, they demonstrated a good understanding and were aware of who to report any concerns.
We found, where required, staff completed safe procedures in the management of people’s medicines. One person told us, “They oversee me taking my medication. It helps me to keep safe.” Staff files contained evidence staff undertook relevant training and all related processes were audited by the management team to check their effectiveness.
Care records we reviewed contained people’s signed consent to their overall and decision-specific support. Staff demonstrated a good awareness of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and associated Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. One staff member said, “I fully respect a person’s right to a good life and to make their own decisions. I support them to do so.”
Records were individualised to each person and staff understood the principles of person-centred care. We saw they supported individuals and their relatives to be fully involved in their care. A staff member explained, “I respect clients like my family. Their wishes and preferences must come first.” People said they had information to guide them about commenting on their care if they chose to.
Staff support matched care planning we reviewed in order to maintain people’s independence. One person said, “The carers are supervising me with my cooking so that I can do it myself.” Where applicable, staff assisted people with their nutritional needs and had training to protect them from unsafe food hygiene.