You are here

Link Community Care (Tottenham) Good

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 23 January 2018

This inspection took place on 10 and 11 November 2017. The provider was given 48 hours' notice because the location provides a domiciliary care service. At the time of the inspection Link Community Care provided domiciliary care and support for 25 people in their own home. The service worked primarily with older people all of whom were living in the same London borough.

This was the first inspection of the service since registration in August 2016.

This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats in the community. It provides a service to older adults and younger disabled adults.

Not everyone using Link Community Care receives regulated activity; CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also take into account any wider social care provided.

There was a registered manager in post. A registered manger 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 law; as does the provider. The registered manager was present during the inspection.

Procedures relating to safeguarding people from harm were in place. Staff we spoke with understood what to do and who to report it to if people were at risk of harm. Staff had an understanding of the systems in place to protect people who could not make decisions and were aware of the legal requirements outlined in the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

The service operated safe staff recruitment procedures and ensured that all staff were suitable for the role before beginning any care work.

Medicines were managed safely and the service was expanding on the number of people that they thought may benefit from staff prompting people to remind them to take medicines.

Risk assessments provided staff with guidance on how to mitigate people’s individual personal risks. Risks had been clearly identified and risk reduction measures were identified and acted upon.

Staff were provided with a suitable induction as well as on-going regular training and supervision to support them in their role.

People were involved in planning their care and had regular reviews to gain their opinion on how things were. Staff knew people well and people and relatives felt that they were treated with dignity and respect. Care plans were person centred and included information on how people wanted their care to be delivered as well as their likes and dislikes.

People and relatives were provided with information on how to make a complaint and their views were obtained and acted upon. People were treated with dignity and respect and trusted the staff that supported them.

People who used the service, relatives and stakeholders had a range of opportunities to provide their views about the quality of the service and the provider monitored the performance of the service.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

Inspection areas



Updated 23 January 2018

The service was safe. Staff were provided with training and guidance to enable them to recognise abuse and how to report it.

Risk assessments provided staff with appropriate guidance on how to keep people safe and this included medicines management. Medicines were managed safely.

The provider followed safe staff recruitment practices and people received a continuity of care and on most occasions had the same staff visiting them.

The provider had taken steps to understand and learn from any incidents that occurred for future reference.



Updated 23 January 2018

The service was effective. People�s needs were assessed in consultation with them and their family if appropriate.

Staff received regular training and an induction before commencing their work.

The service worked in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and recognised how this influenced the care that they provided.

People were supported to have enough to eat and drink so that their dietary needs were met.



Updated 23 January 2018

The service was caring. People were treated with respect and staff maintained privacy and dignity.

People were encouraged to have input into their care and their views were respected. We were informed that care staff usually responded with kindness and respect for people and paid attention to them when providing care.



Updated 23 January 2018

The service was responsive. People's care was person centred and planned in collaboration with them, which people and relatives confirmed.

The provider monitored the care provided to people using spot check visits and regular phone calls to people to ask them about the quality of their care.

People knew how to make a complaint. There was an appropriate complaints procedure in place and the provider responded to any complaints that were made.



Updated 23 January 2018

The service was well led. People were asked about their views on the support they received from the service.

The registered manager had a monitoring system in place to ensure care was assessed, audited and that people�s needs were met.

People�s views were obtained and were acted upon.