• Services in your home
  • Homecare service

J.C.Michael Groups Ltd Barnet

Overall: Requires improvement read more about inspection ratings

522 High Street, Wembley, HA9 7BS (020) 8519 4089

Provided and run by:
J.C.Michael Groups Ltd

Latest inspection summary

On this page

Background to this inspection

Updated 31 May 2023

The inspection

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

Inspection team

The inspection team consisted of two inspectors 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.

Service and service type

J.C.Michael Groups Ltd Barnet provides personal care to people living in their own houses.

Registered Manager

This service is required to have a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the CQC to manage the service. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided. At the time of our inspection there was a registered manager in post.

Notice of inspection

We gave the service two working days' notice of the inspection because the service provides care to people in their own homes and we wanted to make sure that management were available on the day of the inspection site visit.

Inspection activity started on 5 April 2023 and ended on 21 April 2023. We visited the office location on 5 April 2023 to see the registered manager and review records related to the service.

What we did before the inspection

We reviewed information we had received about the service since it was registered with the CQC. We took this into account when we inspected the service and made the judgements in this report. We used all of this information to plan our inspection.

The provider was not asked to complete a Provider Information Return (PIR) prior to this inspection. A PIR is information providers send us to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

During the inspection

We reviewed a range of records related to 10 people’s care and support. This included people’s care plans, risk assessments and medicines records. We also looked at 6 staff files in relation to recruitment and training. We reviewed records related to the management of the service, which included quality assurance records, minutes of staff meetings and a range of policies and procedures. We also reviewed electronic call monitoring (ECM) data. An ECM system is where care workers log in and out of their calls, and the information is recorded.

We spoke with 13 staff members. This included the registered manager, business manager, business support manager, care coordinators and care workers.

The majority of people who received care and support from the service were not able to speak with us due to their health needs. We therefore spoke with their relatives. As part of this inspection, we contacted 29 people and managed to speak with 2 people and 14 relatives. We obtained feedback from two care professionals.

Overall inspection

Requires improvement

Updated 31 May 2023

About the service

J.C.Michael Groups Ltd Barnet is a domiciliary care agency providing personal care to older people living in their own homes. The services they provide include personal care, housework and medicines support. At the time of our inspection the service was providing personal care and support to a total of 80 people. The Care Quality Commission (CQC) only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also consider any wider social care provided.

People’s experience of using this service:

The service failed to ensure care workers were always appropriately deployed to meet people's needs. We found numerous instances where care workers failed to provide care and support for the agreed time specified.

The service had a system in place to monitor the quality of the service being provided to people. However, the service failed to effectively check various aspects of the care provided and identify deficiencies with aspects of care.

Accidents and incidents were not always recorded in accordance with the provider’s policy and procedure. It was also not always evident what investigation and been carried out and what lessons had been learnt to reduce reoccurrence.

There was a recruitment system in place. However, we noted that the provider had not always checked who provided employment references for newly recruited staff. We have made a recommendation in respect of this.

Staff completed an intensive induction and training records were in place. However, we noted that some staff required refresher training. Some supervision notes we reviewed lacked detail. We have made a recommendation in relation to this.

Medicines management was safe and people were appropriately supported with their medicines.

There were systems in place to help safeguard people from the risk of possible harm. Feedback we obtained indicated that people and relatives felt safe in the presence of care workers.

Measures to prevent and control the spread of COVID-19 and other infections were in place.

People and relatives told us that care workers were respectful of people’s privacy and dignity. They told us care workers were kind, helpful and considerate.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

Staff we spoke with told us they enjoyed working at the service and they were well supported by the management team and their colleagues.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection and update

The last rating for the service was good (5 December 2017). Since the previous inspection, the provider has changed its name, although it is the same legal entity running the service.

Why we inspected

This inspection was prompted by a review of the information we held about this service.

Enforcement and recommendations

We have identified two breaches of regulation in relation to staffing and governance at this inspection. Further, we have made two recommendations in relation to staff recruitment and training.

Please see the action we have told the provider to take at the end of this report.

Follow up

We will request an action plan from the provider to understand what they will do to improve the standards of quality and safety. We will work alongside the provider and local authority to monitor progress. We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.