Archived: Brighter Care

Updated 4 March 2018

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.

The inspection was prompted in part by concerns we received about the care provided to people. The concerns ranged from risk management, staff competence and management support. We carried out a comprehensive inspection and we checked all the issues as part of our inspection.

This announced inspection took place on 22 December 2017. The provider was given 48 hours’ advance notice because the location provides a domiciliary care service and we needed to ensure the registered manager and director would be available. It was undertaken by one 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.

.

Prior to the inspection we reviewed the information we held about Brighter Care Limited including notifications we had received. Notifications are information about important events the provider is required to tell us about by law. We also reviewed the Provider Information Return (PIR) we received from the provider. PIR is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We used this information in the planning of the inspection.

During the inspection, we spoke with 11 people and five relatives about the care they received from Brighter Care. We spoke with the registered manager and the director, five care staff, the care supervisor, care coordinator and the duty care manager. We reviewed eight people’s care records including risk assessments and medicines administration record charts. We looked at seven staff files which included recruitment checks, training records and supervision notes. We looked at other records relating to the management and running of the service; such as the provider’s quality assurance systems, complaints and compliments.

Following the inspection we received feedback from six professionals involved in people’s care about the service provided by Brighter Care.

Updated 4 March 2018

This inspection took place on 21 December 2017 and was announced. Brighter Care Limited is a domiciliary care service that provides care to people in their own home. It provides a service to older adults. At the time of the inspection the service was providing personal care to 60 people in their homes.

At the last inspection of July 2016, we asked the provider to take action to make improvements to the way they managed risks to people. The service sent us an action plan on how they would make the required improvements. At this inspection, we found the action plan had been completed.

The service had a registered manager at the time of the 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.

The leadership and management of the service was good. The person-centred approach and care people received was evident in all aspects of the service. Staff were passionate about providing high quality support to people and felt that managers listened to and acted upon their ideas and suggestions. Staff spoke highly of the managers and providers. Staff were motivated and empowered to develop professionally and in their careers. The provider rigorously assessed and monitored the quality of the service. They put steps in place to constantly improve quality.

The service responded to people’s needs in a very personalised way. Care plans were person-centred and focused on achieving the best possible outcomes for people in an individualised manner. The service adopted an individualised approach and focused on building positive relationship with people. The service actively involved and consulted with people and their relatives in planning and developing their care plan. The views of people and their relatives were considered and used.

Care records reflected people’s personal histories and backgrounds. Staff were matched with people taking into accounts their interests, culture and personalities. Staff were encouraged to report every incident and accident. The registered manager reviewed them and took actions to address them and reduce reoccurrence. Lessons were shared with staff.

Staff were trained to keep people safe and report any concern of abuse. The likelihood of people experiencing avoidable harm was therefore reduced. Senior staff members carried out an assessment of people’s needs and risks and developed plans to alleviate them. The service followed best practice guidelines in assessing people’s needs and risks.

There were sufficient numbers of experienced staff to support people. Staff recruited were vetted to ensure they were suitable to deliver care and support to people. Staff provided people with the support they required to take their medicines safely.

People received care and support from trained, skilled and knowledgeable staff. People received the support they required to eat and drink. Staff supported people to maintain their health and access healthcare professionals as their needs required. The service had system in place to ensure they continued to receive the support they needed when they moved between services.

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 support this practice. People consented to their care before they were delivered. People and their relatives were involved in making decisions about their care. Staff and the registered manager understood their roles and responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005.

People received care from staff who were compassionate and caring. Staff supported people to make day to day decisions about their care. People were involved in planning and delivering their care. People were encouraged to maintain their independence. People’s privacy was respected and their dignity was promoted. Staff knew people well and had developed positive relationship with them.

People’s care was delivered in a flexible manner and met their preferences and requirements. People knew how to complain if the wished. The registered manager investigated and addressed each complaint received about the service. Staff were trained to deliver end-of-life care if needed.

People, relatives, professionals and staff told us the organisation was well managed. The service operated an open and transparent culture. The service worked jointly with other agencies including social services, commissioning teams and training providers to improve the service.