We carried out a review of the data available to us about Active Care & Support Ltd 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 Active Care & Support Ltd, you can give feedback on this service.
Active Care & Support Ltd is a domiciliary care service which provides personal care and support to people in their own homes. At the time of the inspection there were 90 people using the service. Everyone using the service lived within the London Borough of Brent and had their service commissioned by the local authority.
People's experience of using this service
People said they felt safe using the service. There were effective systems to minimise risks and there was information to guide care workers when delivering support to people, including how to reduce identified risks.
There were systems in place to ensure proper and safe use of medicines. People received their medication safely. People were also protected from the risks associated with poor infection control.
Care workers had been recruited safely. There were sufficient care workers deployed to keep people safe. An electronic scheduling, monitoring system was in place to manage staff shifts and absences.
People's needs were assessed, before support plans and risk assessments were drawn up. Agreed goals of care were delivered in line with standards, guidance and the law. People received support that met their individual needs. Care workers were knowledgeable about people’s needs. They could describe to us how people liked to be supported.
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's privacy and dignity was respected. People told us that care workers treated them with respect and kindness. People felt that care workers treated them fairly, regardless of age, gender or disability. Practical provisions had been made to support people’s diversity, including gender preferences.
People were supported, if needed, to express their views and preferences in relation to their care and support. The service identified and recorded how people wished to communicate and their communication needs.
There was a complaints procedure, which people and their relatives were aware of.
There were methods of monitoring the quality of the service in place. Regular checks and audits had been carried out.
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 (published 03 May 2017).
Why we inspected
This was a routine comprehensive inspection and in line with our timescales to inspecting Requires Improvement rated services.
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 the last inspection, the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.
People told us they felt safe with the support they received from staff. There were arrangements in place to help safeguard people from the risk of abuse.
The provider ensured there were safe recruitment procedures in place to help protect people from the risks of being cared for by staff assessed to be unfit or unsuitable.
Staff told us and we saw from their records that they had received training in relevant areas of their work. This training enabled staff to support people effectively.
Staff understood their responsibilities in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005. People told us and we saw from their records they were involved in making decisions about their care and support and their consent was sought and documented.
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 supported to eat and drink in a safe manner. Their support plans included an assessment of their nutrition and hydration needs.
People told us they were treated with dignity and respect. Staff understood the need to protect people’s privacy and dignity. People told us staff knocked on their doors before they could enter their homes.
The service encouraged people to raise any concerns they had and responded to them in a timely manner.
The provider had systems in place to continually monitor the quality of the service and people were asked for their opinions and action plans were developed where required to address areas for improvements.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.
Active Care & Support Limited is a domiciliary care agency that is registered to provide personal care to adults living in their own homes. At the time of this inspection 57 people were supported by the agency.
The inspection was announced. We gave the provider 48 hours’ notice of our inspection. We did this to ensure we would be able to meet with people and staff at the service.
There was a registered manager in post at the service. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service and has the legal responsibility for meeting the requirements of the law; as does the provider. 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.
Our last inspection at Active Care & Support Ltd took place on 17 May 2013. The service was found to be meeting the requirements of the regulations we inspected at that time.
There were systems and processes in place to protect people who used the service from the risk of harm. Staff were aware of different types of abuse, what constituted poor practice and action to take if abuse was suspected.
Risk assessments were in place for people using the service and care workers. The provider had a lone worker policy and care workers told us of the systems they followed in case of emergency as they were lone workers.
We found that safe recruitment and selection procedures were in place and appropriate checks had been undertaken before staff began work. This included obtaining references from previous employers to show staff employed were safe to work with vulnerable people.
Appropriate systems were in place for the management of medicines so that people received their medicines safely. People were supported with their medicines by suitably trained and experienced staff. Medicines were managed safely and securely.
People received care and support from staff who had the appropriate skills and knowledge to care for them. All staff received induction, training and support from experienced members of staff. Records of supervision were detailed and showed the registered manager worked with staff to identify their personal and professional development.
People were supported to maintain good health and have access to healthcare professionals and services.
People who could not make specific decisions for themselves had their legal rights protected. Their care plans showed that when decisions had been made about their care, where they lacked capacity, these had been made in people’s best interests.
The provider carried out assessments to identify health and support needs of people. Each person had a person centred plan which showed how they wished to be supported.
The provider had a system in place for responding to any concerns and complaints. People told us the provider responded immediately if they raised any concerns
There were effective systems in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service provided. Staff told us that the service had an open, inclusive and positive culture.
Relatives commented positively on staff timekeeping, reiterating that 'timekeeping of carers is very good'. A relative told us, 'when our carer goes on holiday, the agency always send a familiar carer to us'.
People received safe care that was focused on their individual needs. Regular reviews of care ensured all care provision reflected each individual's changing care needs.
Records and feedback from staff and some people indicated that staff were properly trained, supervised and appraised. We noted the selection, screening and recruitment of staff ensured that jobs were filled by the most suitably qualified and experienced applicants.
Staff demonstrated that they understood aspects of the safeguarding process relevant to them. They told us they were well supported by the management and were aware of their limitations but confident to approach managers when they needed to.
People told us staff were friendly and respectful and confirmed their privacy and dignity were always respected. Everyone we spoke with knew how to make a complaint and those who had done so were satisfied that their complaints were properly investigated.