Home Care For You Blackburn

Homecare For You Blackburn is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats in the community. At the time of the inspection there were 114 people using the service.

Not everyone who used the service received personal care. 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 and what we found

People told us they were happy with the service they received and felt safe. They said staff were kind and friendly. Safeguarding adults’ procedures were in place and staff understood how to protect people from abuse. Recruitment processes ensured new staff were suitable to work for the agency. There were enough numbers of staff deployed to meet people's needs in a punctual, consistent and flexible way and to ensure their safety. People received their medicines when they needed them from staff who had been trained and had their competency checked. Risk assessments were carried out to enable people to retain their independence and receive support with minimum risk to themselves or others.

People were given 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’s care and support needs were assessed prior to them using the service to ensure their needs could be met. Improved arrangements were in place to ensure staff received ongoing training, supervision and support. People were supported at mealtimes in line with their support plan and staff worked in partnership with healthcare professionals, when needed.

Management and staff had developed friendly, caring and respectful relationships with people using the service and their families. Staff knew about people’s backgrounds and about their routines and preferences; this made sure people’s care was tailored to their specific needs. People, or their family members, had been consulted about their care needs and had been involved in the support planning process. People had access to activities if this was in line with their support plan. People were aware of how they could raise any complaints, concerns and compliments and had access to a complaint’s procedure.

Improvements had been made to the way the quality of the service was monitored. Any noted shortfalls were addressed. The values of the service were known to staff. Staff told us they received support from management and they felt valued. People’s views and opinions of the service were sought and acted on. People told us the service was well-managed.

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 this service was requires improvement (published 13 December 2018).

The provider completed an action plan after the last inspection to show what they would do and by when to improve. At this inspection we found improvements had been made and the provider was no longer in breach of regulations.

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Enforcement

Since the last inspection, we recognised that the provider had failed to display their ratings. This was a breach of regulation and we issued a fixed penalty notice. The provider accepted a fixed penalty and paid this in full. During this inspection we found the web site reflected the current rating.

Follow up

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

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, younger disabled adults and children. People's care and housing were provided under separate contractual agreements. CQC does not regulate premises used for people supported in their own homes; this inspection looked at people's personal care and support. At the time of the visit there were 140 people who used the service.

The service had a registered manager in place. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the CQC 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 service was last inspected on the 10 and 11 October 2017 and 04 December 2017. At that inspection we made a recommendation that the service developed practice in relation to the application of the principles of the Mental Capacity Act. We checked on this during this inspection and found no action had been taken and no improvements had been made and this is therefore a breach of the regulations. We have also made recommendations in relation to training and action to be taken by the registered manager and provider. As a result, the overall rating for the service has deteriorated to requires improvement.

You can see what action we have told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.

Prior to our inspection, we received information of concern in relation to a lack of training for staff. We looked at this during this inspection and have made a recommendation regarding staff training.

Quality and safety audits were not always effective in identifying issues of concern and driving improvements in practice. We made a recommendation regarding this.

All the people we spoke with who used the service told us they felt safe. Staff told us and records we looked at confirmed, staff had received training in safeguarding. Staff knew their responsibilities to report any concerns.

Prior to our inspection, we received information of concern in relation to new staff members commencing employment without the necessary checks being carried out. During this inspection we checked if people were protected by the staff recruitment procedures. We found staff had been adequately checked to ensure they were suitable to work with vulnerable adults.

Risk assessments had been completed to ensure people were safe. Risks were reviewed on a regular basis or when these changed.

Also prior to our inspection, we received information of concern in relation to a shortage of staff and missed visits. None of the staff we spoke with had concerns about staffing levels. Feedback we received from people who used the service showed there was no concerns about missed visits. We had no concerns about staffing levels or missed visits during our inspection.

Staff we spoke with told us they received regular supervisions and appraisals and felt supported in their roles. Records we looked at confirmed that staff had regular supervisions.

Care records we looked at showed people’s needs and choices were assessed prior to commencing a package of care with the service. We noted they did not ask a person’s sexual orientation. We discussed this with the registered manager who told us this could be added in going forward.

We received many positive comments about the care and compassion staff members showed to people. During the inspection we did not have the opportunity to observe interactions whilst staff were supporting people who used the service. However, those staff we spoke with discussed people they supported in a kind and caring manner.

Staff told us how they ensured people’s privacy and dignity was respected when they were providing support with personal care. The service also had privacy and dignity policies and procedures in place to guide staff in their roles.

We looked at audits in place within the service. We saw the registered manager had a different auditing system since our previous inspection, which was not robust. The lack of robust audits in place demonstrated why we found a number of concerning issues during our inspection.

Staff told us, and records we looked at confirmed, regular staff meetings were held. Staff told us they were able to have discussions about anything they wanted to in these meetings.

Home Care for You Limited Blackburn is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses, flats in the community and specialist housing. It provides a service to older adults, younger disabled adults, and children. People’s care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. CQC does not regulate premises used for people supported in their own homes; this inspection looked at people’s personal care and support. At the time of the visit there were 144 people who used the service.

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

There were policies and procedures on how the service protected people against bullying, harassment, avoidable harm and abuse. Care staff had received training in safeguarding adults and knew how to report concerns. Staff had sought advice from other health and social care professionals about safeguarding issues where necessary. There were risk assessments which had been undertaken. Plans to minimise or remove risks had been recorded and reviewed in line with the organisation’s policy. These were robust and covered specific risks around people’s care and specific activities they undertook in a person centred manner.

There was a medicines policy in place and staff had been trained to safely support people with their medicines.

We looked at recruitment processes and found the service had policies and procedures in place to help ensure safety in the recruitment of staff. These had been followed to ensure staff were recruited safely for the protection and wellbeing of people who used the service. Records we saw and conversations with staff showed the service had adequate care staff to ensure that people's needs were sufficiently met. Staff had visited people at agreed times.

Staff skills knowledge, training and support demonstrated a commitment to providing a good quality of care.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. However, knowledge and application of the mental capacity principles required further improvements. The registered manager informed us people's consent was sought. However, care records did not demonstrate how mental capacity had been considered in one person's record. We have made a recommendation about staff knowledge and understanding on the subject of mental capacity and best interests’ decisions.

Care plans were in place detailing how people wished to be supported.

Staff responsible for assisting people with their medicines had received training to ensure they had the competency and skills required. Medicines records had been audited regularly.

We found people had been assisted to have access to healthcare professionals and their healthcare needs were met.

People who used the service and their relatives knew how to raise a concern or to make a complaint. The complaints procedure was available and people said they were encouraged to raise concerns.

The registered manager used a variety of methods to assess and monitor the quality of service provided to people. These included regular internal audits of the service, surveys, staff meetings and review meetings to seek the views of people about the quality of care being provided.