• Services in your home
  • Homecare service

Archived: Age UK Newcastle

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Second Floor, Mea House, Ellison Place, Newcastle Upon Tyne, NE1 8XS (0191) 235 9900

Provided and run by:
Age Concern Newcastle Upon Tyne

Latest inspection summary

On this page

Background to this inspection

Updated 21 December 2016

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This inspection took place on 16 November 2016 and was announced. The provider was given two working days’ notice of the inspection as the service is a domiciliary care agency and we needed to make sure the provider’s representative was available to assist us with this inspection. We also made telephone calls to staff, people and their relatives on 23, 24 and 25 November 2016.

This inspection was undertaken by one adult social care inspector and an expert by experience. An expert by experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

Before the inspection we reviewed the information we held about the service. This included the notifications we had received from the provider. Notifications are changes, events or incidents the provider is legally obliged to send us within required timescales. We also contacted other agencies such as local authorities and Healthwatch to gain their views of the service.

During the inspection we spoke with five people who used the service by telephone and four relatives. We spoke with staff including the registered manager, the chief executive, the home support manager, the head of quality and three care workers. We reviewed a sample of seven people’s care records, five staff personnel files and other records relating to the management of the service.

Overall inspection

Good

Updated 21 December 2016

This inspection took place between 16 and 25 November 2016 and was announced. This was the first inspection of this service following a change in its registration in August 2016.

Age UK Newcastle is a domiciliary care agency operated by Age Concern Newcastle, which is a registered charity. Age UK Newcastle is registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to provide personal care to people in their own homes. At the time of this inspection it was providing personal care to 38 people.

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 a legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

The service had taken appropriate steps to keep people safe from harm. Staff were provided with safeguarding training which was refreshed every three years. The importance of safeguarding people using the service was discussed during staff member's regular supervision sessions. Staff we spoke with were aware of their responsibilities for recognising and reporting any signs of abuse. People we spoke with told us they felt safe.

Possible risks to the health and safety of people using the service and the staff members who supported them were assessed. Where risks were identified, action was taken to mitigate or manage these risks. This included the use of care plans to provide advice and guidance to staff on how best to support the person safely.

Appropriate systems were in place to ensure new staff were suitable to work with vulnerable people. Where the service was asked to take on a package of care, an assessment was undertaken to determine whether it was able to do this safely.

Staff received training in the safe administration of medicines and had their competency to do this assessed before they were allowed to support people. However, we found the records held in relation to medicines did not always clearly show the support people received from the service.

Staff were provided with the necessary support in terms of training, supervision and appraisal to enable them to perform their roles effectively.

The service worked within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. People’s capacity to make decisions about their care and treatment was assessed by the service. Where appropriate ‘best interest’ decisions were made on people’s behalf and involved relevant parties. People were asked to give their formal consent to their care and treatment. Care records advised staff of any support people required to make decisions, for example through the use of an advocate.

Care workers were described as kind and caring and people were very positive about the care and support they received from the service. People told us they received care from the same group of staff which provided them with the opportunity to get to know them and feel comfortable with them. Everyone we spoke with told us they would recommend the service to others.

People’s needs were assessed when they were first referred to the service to establish whether the service would be able to meet them. Information gathered during this process was used to develop care plans which provided information to staff about the care and support people required. Care plans were regularly reviewed to ensure they continued to meet people’s needs. Where changes were required these were made promptly.

The service had a complaints policy and procedure that people were informed about when they first joined the service. All complaints received by the service were logged and investigated. Where appropriate, written responses were provided to complainants. These outlined the actions taken by the service in response to their complaint. Annual surveys were also used to obtain feedback from people about the quality of the service. Records showed action was taken to improve the service in response to comments and complaints from people, their relatives and staff.

People and staff told us the service was well managed. There was a clear management structure in place and staff told us they were always able to speak to a senior member of staff if they required advice or support.

The service had a range of systems in place for monitoring and improving the effectiveness of the service. Action was taken to address areas identified as needing improvement. Regular reports were produced for senior management in relation to the performance and quality of the service that people received.