You are here

Archived: MNA Home Care Services Ltd - Hounslow Good

This service was previously registered at a different address - see old profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 2 August 2016

This inspection took place on 19 July 2016 and was announced.

We gave the provider 24 hours’ notice because the location provides a domiciliary care service and we needed to be sure someone would be available.

The service had recently been registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) and had not been inspected before.

MNA Home Care Services Limited (Hounslow) is a domiciliary care agency which provides personal care for people in their own homes. At the time of our inspection, there were 57 people using the service. Most people who used the service were receiving funding from Hounslow local authority, and a few people were funded by Surrey County Council.

Some people who received a service were older people and included those with physical frailty or memory loss due to the progression of age, whilst others were living with the experience of dementia or had mental health needs. A few people receiving a service had a learning disability. The frequency of visits varied from one to four visits per day depending on people's individual needs.

There was a registered manager in post at the time of our inspection. 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.

The risks to people's wellbeing and safety had been assessed, and there were detailed plans in place for all the risks identified.

There were procedures for safeguarding adults and the care workers were aware of these. Care workers knew how to respond to any medical emergencies or significant changes in a person's wellbeing.

Feedback from people and their relatives was positive. Most people said they had regular care workers visiting which enabled them to build a rapport and get to know them.

People's needs were assessed by the local authority prior to receiving a service and support plans were developed from the assessments. People had taken part in the planning of their care and received regular visits from the visiting officers and the registered manager.

People we spoke with and their relatives said that they were happy with the level of care they were receiving from the service.

The registered manager was aware of their responsibilities in line with the requirements of the

Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and told us that all staff had received training in this. Records showed that people had consented to their care and support and had their capacity assessed prior to receiving a service from MNA Home Care Services Limited (Hounslow). Nobody was being deprived of their liberty unlawfully as Deprivation of Liberty applications had been made as required.

There were systems in place to ensure that people received their medicines safely and the care workers had received training in the management of medicines.

The service employed enough staff to meet people's needs safely and had contingency plans in place in the event of staff absence. Recruitment checks were in place to obtain information about new staff before they supported people unsupervised.

People's health and nutritional needs had been assessed, recorded and were being monitored.

Care workers received an induction and shadowing period before delivering care and support to people. They received the training and support they needed to care for people.

There was a complaints procedure in place which the provider followed. This was available in different languages. People felt confident that if they raised a complaint, they would be listened to and their concerns addressed.

There were systems in place to monitor and assess the quality and effectiveness of the service, and the provider ensured that areas for improvement were identified and addressed.

People, staff and relatives told us that the registered manager and senior team were approachable and supportive. There was a clear management structure, and they encouraged an open and transparent culture within the service. People and staff were supported to raise concerns and make suggestions about where improvements could be made.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 2 August 2016

The service was safe.

The risks to people's safety and wellbeing were assessed and there were detailed plans in place for all the risks identified.

There were procedures for safeguarding adults and staff were aware of these.

People were given the support they needed with medicines and there were regular audits by the visiting officers.

The service employed enough staff and contingency plans were in place in the event of staff absence. Recruitment checks were undertaken to obtain information about new staff before they supported people unsupervised.

Effective

Good

Updated 2 August 2016

The service was effective.

The registered manager was aware of their responsibilities in line with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and understood its principles. People had consented to their care and support. Nobody was being deprived of their liberty unlawfully.

Staff received the training and support they needed to care for people.

People's health and nutritional needs had been assessed, recorded and were being monitored.

Caring

Good

Updated 2 August 2016

The service was caring.

Feedback from people and relatives was positive about both the care workers and the provider.

People and relatives said the care workers were kind, caring and respectful. Most people received care from regular care workers and developed a trusting relationship.

People and their relatives were involved in decisions about their care and support.

Responsive

Good

Updated 2 August 2016

The service was responsive.

People's individual needs had been assessed and recorded in their care plans prior to receiving a service, and were regularly reviewed.

There was a complaints policy in place. People knew how to make a complaint, and felt confident that their concerns would be addressed appropriately.

The service regularly conducted satisfaction surveys of people and their relatives. These provided vital information about the quality of the service provided.

Well-led

Good

Updated 2 August 2016

The service was well-led.

At the time of our inspection, the service employed a registered manager.

People and their relatives found the management team to be approachable and supportive.

There were systems in place to assess and monitor the quality of the service.

The registered manager organised meetings for staff and people who used the service. This encouraged openness and the sharing of information.