You are here

Premium Home Care Services Limited Good Also known as Home Instead Senior Care

We are carrying out a review of quality at Premium Home Care Services Limited. We will publish a report when our review is complete. Find out more about our inspection reports.


Inspection carried out on 26 October 2016

During a routine inspection

This inspection took place on 26 October 2016 was announced. The provider was given 48 hours’ notice because the location provides domiciliary care service and we needed to be sure that someone would be at the office.

Premium Home Care Services Limited is a domiciliary care service providing care and support to people living in their own homes. The office is based in the city of Leicester and the service currently provides care and support to people living in Leicester and Leicestershire. At the time of our inspection there were nine people using the service. People’s packages of care varied dependent upon their needs. The provider employed five caregivers.

This was our first inspection of the service since they registered with us on July 2016.

A registered manager was in post. 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.

People were supported in their own homes with their daily care needs and support to maintain their independence. The relatives of people who used the service told us that their family members were safe and were happy with the service being provided.

Systems were in place to ensure that people who used the service were protected from the risk of abuse. The provider, registered manager and caregivers were trained in the safeguarding adults, understood their responsibility and were aware of the procedures to follow if they suspected that someone was at risk of harm.

People’s care records showed people’s needs had been assessed and measures were in place to manage risks. People were involved in the development of their care plan to ensure that caregivers knew how to meet people’s needs that promoted their safety and independence.

People were supported to take their medicines safely. Caregivers supported people, where required, with their meals and drinks. Records showed people were support to access healthcare services when required.

The provider’s recruitment procedures ensured that caregivers were suitable to look after. People were supported by a consistent team of caregivers who supported them and whom they felt confident with.

Relatives we spoke with were complimentary about the caregivers’ skills, knowledge, attitude and approach in how they supported their family members’. Caregivers undertook an induction and a range of training relevant to the needs of people using the service. Staff received regular support and supervision which enabled them to provide people with effective care.

Caregivers understood the relevant requirements of the Mental Capacity Act (2005) and how it applied to people in their care. Caregivers sought consent from people before providing care and understood people's right to decline their care and support.

Relatives told us that they and their family member had developed positive relationships with the caregivers and the management team. People’s privacy and dignity was respected and caregivers understood their role in enabling people to maintain their welling. Caregivers recognised that some people were at risk of loneliness and isolation and therefore, ensured the time spent with people was meaningful.

Caregivers were knowledgeable about people's preferences and how they wished to be supported, which promoted their wellbeing. The registered manager updated people’s care plans to ensure caregivers had clear guidance to follow, which helped to ensure people’s needs could be monitored effectively.

The provider had a complaints policy which provided people and their relatives with clear information about how to raise any concerns and how they would be managed. Relatives were confident that any concerns raised would be responded listened to and addressed.

The provider and registered