Archived: Sugarman Health and Wellbeing - Birmingham

Updated 7 January 2020

The Inspection:

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 is 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.

Inspection team:

The inspection was carried out by one inspector.

Service and service type:

Sugarman Health and Wellbeing - Birmingham provides domiciliary care and support for people living either in their own homes or in their own homes within a residential care setting. On the day of our visit they were supporting eight people.

The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

Inspection site visit activity started on 26 November 2019.

What we did:

When planning our inspection, we looked at the information we held about the service. This included notifications received from the provider about deaths, accidents/incidents and safeguarding alerts, which they are required to send us by law. We also contacted the Local Authority commissioning service and the local Healthwatch for any relevant information they may have to support our inspection. Healthwatch is an independent consumer champion that gathers and represents the views of the public about health and social care services in England.

The provider had completed a provider information return prior to this inspection. This is information we require providers to send us to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We took this into account when we inspected the service and made the judgements in this report.

During our visit we were informed of the views of one person who uses the service via an advocate. We also discussed the care provided with four relatives, three members of care staff, the registered manager and the quality director.

We looked at the care records of three people who used the service and three staff files, as well as the medicine management processes and records maintained by the provider about recruitment and staff training. We also looked at records relating to the management of the service and a selection of the service’s policies and procedures to check people received a quality service.

Updated 7 January 2020

About the service:

Sugarman Health and Wellbeing - Birmingham provides a domiciliary care service for people either in their own homes or in their own homes within a residential care setting.

People’s experience of using this service:

People were kept safe and secure from risk of harm. Potential risks to people had been assessed and managed appropriately by the provider. People received their medicines safely and as prescribed and were supported by sufficient numbers of staff to ensure that risk of harm was minimised.

Staff had been recruited appropriately and had received relevant training, so they were able to support people with their individual care and support needs.

Staff sought people’s consent before providing care and support. 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 treated with kindness and compassion. People’s right to privacy was respected by the staff who supported them, and their dignity was maintained. People were supported to express their views and be actively involved in making decisions about their care and support needs.

There is a positive emphasis on continually striving to improve the service and maintain high sustainable standards of care. The vision and values of the service are embedded in a person-centred culture which places people firmly at the heart of the service.

People and relatives were confident about approaching the registered manager if they needed to. The views of people on the quality of the service was gathered and used to support service development.

The provider had auditing systems in place to monitor the effectiveness and quality of service provision.

The provider worked in partnership with other organisations to ensure they are following current practice and providing high quality care.

Rating at last inspection:

The last rating for the service was good {published May 2017}. At this inspection we found the service had remained the same.

Why we inspected:

This was a planned inspection based on the rating at the last inspection.

Follow up:

We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our inspection programme. If any concerning information is received we may inspect sooner.