We carried out a review of the data available to us about A Class 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 A Class Care, you can give feedback on this service.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People and relatives praised the care and support provided. The management team had a clear vision of providing good care and support that enabled people to live and receive care in their own homes.
People felt safe receiving the service. The provider had processes in place to minimise the risk of abuse and avoidable harm. Staff had received training and were confident to recognise and report any concerns. People received their medicines at the right times.
The provider continued to operate a robust recruitment process. Staff had the time to ensure they met people’s needs safely, and in a way that suited them. People received care from staff who were trained and well supported. The service sought additional training and support from external care professionals when people had a specific health condition or care need. This ensured people received the care and 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. People were involved in making decisions about their care and support. Staff supported people to express their views and consulted them about all aspects of their care.
The registered manager and staff were caring and provided people’s care in a person-centred way. Staff were kind, and treated people with dignity and respect.
People’s care plans were personalised and provided staff with comprehensive guidance on how to meet people's needs. Staff reviewed people’s needs regularly, involving relevant people.
Systems were in place to deal with any concerns or complaints. Senior staff thoroughly investigated any complaints, responded to the complainant and took action to reduce the risk of recurrence where appropriate.
The directors constantly reviewed the service provided. Information was gathered from a range of sources and reviewed to identify any trends and lessons learnt were cascaded to staff. They were forward thinking and looked for ways to improve the service.
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 (the last report was published 30 March 2018).
Why we inspected
The inspection was prompted in part due to concerns received about the level of care provided and the level of training and supervision staff received. A decision was made for us to inspect and examine those risks.
We found no evidence during this inspection that people were at risk of harm from this concern. Please see the effective, responsive, and well-led sections of this full report.
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.
At our last inspection carried out on 11 February 2016 we rated the service good. At this inspection on 14, 15 and 26 February 2018 we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.
Why the service is rated good.
The Care Quality Commission (CQC) records showed that 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.
Staff had an understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. Staff knew how to report any suspicions of harm and poor care practice.
People were assisted to take their medication as prescribed. Processes were followed by staff members to make sure that infection prevention and control was promoted and the risk of cross contamination was reduced when supporting people.
Staff assisted people in a caring, patient and respectful way. People’s dignity and privacy was promoted and maintained by the staff members supporting them.
People and their relatives were involved in the setting up and review of their or their family member’s individual support and care plans. People were supported by staff to have enough to eat and drink.
People were assisted to access a range of external health care professionals to maintain their health and well-being. Staff and external health care professionals, would, when required, support people at the end of their life, to have a comfortable and as dignified a death as possible.
People had individualised care and support plans in situ which documented their needs. These plans informed staff on how a person would like their care and support to be given, in line with external health and social care professional advice.
There were enough staff to meet people’s individual care and support needs. Individual risks to people were identified and monitored by staff to allow them to live as safe and independent a life as practicable. Staff were only employed within the service after all essential checks had been suitably completed. Staff were trained to be able to provide care which met people’s individual needs. The standard of staff members’ work performance was reviewed through spot checks, supervisions and appraisals.
Compliments about the care and support provided had been received. Complaints received were investigated and responded to. Actions were taken to reduce the risk of recurrence. The registered manager sought feedback about the quality of the service provided from people. There was an on-going quality monitoring process in place to identify areas of improvement needed within the service.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.
This announced inspection took place on 11, 15 and 16 February 2016.
The service had a registered manager in place. 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.
Staff were only employed after the provider carried out satisfactory pre-employment checks. Staff were trained and well supported by their managers. There were sufficient staff to meet people’s assessed needs. People received care and support from staff who were kind and respectful. Staff respected people’s privacy and dignity.
Systems were in place to ensure people’s safety was effectively managed. Staff were aware of the procedures for reporting concerns and of how to protect people from harm.
People’s care needs were effectively met. People were provided with a balanced diet and staff were aware of people’s dietary needs. People received their prescribed medicines appropriately and medicines were stored in a safe way.
The Care Quality Commission (CQC) is required by law to monitor the operation of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and report on what we find. There were formal systems in place to assess people’s capacity for decision making. Applications had been made to the authorising agencies for people who needed these safeguards. Staff respected people choices and staff were aware of the key legal requirements of the MCA and DoLS.
People were encouraged to provide feedback on the service in various ways both formally and informally. People, and their relatives, were involved in their care assessments and reviews. Care records were detailed and provided staff with sufficient guidance to provide consistent care to each person that met their needs. Changes to people’s care was kept under review to ensure the change was effective.
The registered manager was supported by an operations manager, a liaison officer, an administrator and care workers. The service was well run and the registered manager and other staff were approachable. People’s views were listened to and acted on.