We carried out a review of the data available to us about Advantage Healthcare - Nottingham 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 Advantage Healthcare - Nottingham, you can give feedback on this service.
People’s experience of using this service: People and relatives were extremely satisfied with the service people received and spoke highly of staff, nurses and the registered manager. People were supported by a small team of staff that understood their needs.
We found there were systems, processes and practices, which followed effectively to safeguard people from situations in which they may experience abuse including physical harm. Risks to people’s safety had been thoroughly assessed, monitored and managed so they were supported to stay safe while their freedom was respected. People told us they received their medicines as prescribed. Medicines administration records (MARs) reviewed had been completed by staff and were regularly audited confirming people's medicines were safely managed and accounted for.
Safe recruitment practices were followed before new care staff had been appointed. Staff had received all the training required to support people safely. Staff received regular supervision and annual appraisals and were able to reflect on the care and support they delivered. People were protected by the provider's processes for the prevention and control of infection. The provider was able to demonstrate lessons had been learnt when things had gone wrong.
People received personalised care that was responsive to their needs. Care staff understood the importance of promoting equality and diversity by supporting people to make choices about their care. Confidential personal information was kept private. Staff protected people’s rights; to lead as normal a life as possible. 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.
The service encouraged regular feedback from people who used the service, relatives, care staff and professionals. One complaint had been received in the last 12 months and this had been responded to appropriately. People were introduced to lay advocates if necessary.
Comprehensive quality checks had been completed. This ensured people benefited from the service being able to quickly put problems right so that people could consistently receive safe care. People and relatives benefited from a robust professional management framework, which helped care staff to understand their responsibilities so that risks and regulatory requirements were met. Good team work was promoted and care staff were supported to speak out if they had any concerns about people not being treated in the right way. In addition, the registered persons worked in partnership with other agencies and stakeholders to support the development of joined-up care.
There was a registered manager in charge of day to day care operations, whose office team were in regular contact with staff and people.
Rating at last inspection: At the last inspection on 8 April 2017 we rated the service Good.
Follow up: We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received, we may inspect sooner.
The service had a registered manager in place 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.
Staff were knowledgeable about safeguarding procedures in order to protect people from harm. Risks to people had been identified and assessed and appropriate measures were in place to reduce the risk.
People received their medicines as prescribed by staff that had been trained in the safe administration of medicines.
People were cared for by sufficient numbers of staff who had been safely recruited. Staff had received training and had their competency assessed however the consistency and knowledge base of staff required improvement.
People were encouraged to make independent decisions. However, improvements were required to ensure that people who were not able to make their own decisions had their rights protected.
People were supported with their healthcare needs although some relatives felt that further support was required to ensure people were prompted and encouraged to eat.
People had positive relationships with care workers who treated them with kindness and respected their privacy and dignity.
People who used the service, or their representatives, were encouraged to contribute to the planning of their care and to give their views on the running of the service. People were provided with information about how to complain about the service and records showed complaints were responded to.
People received personalised care. People had care and support plans in place and relatives told us that changes to their relations support needs were acted upon. People’s care plans generally contained detailed guidance for staff and were kept up to date.
People benefitted from an open culture which encouraged feedback. Staff felt supported and the management promoted strong values which were embedded in the service.
Systems were in place to monitor the quality of the service. When issues were identified action was taken to address these.