The Care Bureau Ltd - Domiciliary Care - Rugby

People's experience of using this service:

•People told us they felt safe with staff who visited them in their home.

•People's safety had been considered by the provider, risk management plans were in place to maintain people's safety.

•Staff had received training in relation to safeguarding and knew how to protect people from harm.

•Medicines were managed safely.

•The risk of any infection spreading was reduced by the maintenance of good hygiene practice.

•The provider delivered person-centred care, according to the needs and wishes of people who used the service.

•The provider invested in staff induction, training and development to ensure people received care from supported and skilled staff.

•The provider had a complaints policy and process in place; people told us they would feel comfortable raising complaints.

•The provider had quality monitoring arrangements through which they continually reviewed evaluated and improved people's care.

•People, stakeholders and staff had an opportunity to shape the service through feedback and suggestions.

Why we inspected – The inspection was prompted in part by notification of a potential serious incident. At the time of our inspection, we were aware of an ongoing investigation. Whilst this inspection did not examine the circumstances of the incident, we considered the provider’s management of risks; staff training, and quality assurance procedures. We may review the incident in more detail when the ongoing investigation is concluded.

Rating at last inspection: Good. The last report for The Care Bureau – Domiciliary Care – Rugby was published in November 2017.

At this inspection we found the service continued to be rated as Good in both Safe and Well Led.

Follow up: We will continue to monitor the service to ensure it meets its regulatory requirements. More information is in the 'Detailed Findings' below.

There was a registered manager in post. 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 service is provided for adults of any age who may live with dementia, learning disabilities, autistic spectrum disorder, a physical disability or sensory impairment. At the time of our inspection, 140 people were receiving the service.

People were protected from the risks of abuse. Staff were trained in safeguarding and understood the action they should take if they had any concerns that people were at risk of harm. The provider checked staff’s suitability to deliver personal care in people’s own homes during the recruitment process.

Care plans included risk assessments for people’s individual health and wellbeing and described the actions staff needed to take to minimise the identified risks. Staff understood people’s needs and abilities because they read the care plans and shadowed experienced staff when they started working for the service.

The registered manager assessed risks in each person’s home and their care plans included the equipment and number of staff needed to support them safely.

People’s medicines were administered safely because the provider’s medicines administration policy included training staff and checking that people received their medicines as prescribed.

Staff had the training and skills to enable them to meet people’s needs effectively. People were supported to seek advice from healthcare professionals when their health needs changed.

The manager understood their responsibility to comply with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

People, their families and other health professionals were involved in making decisions about their care and support. Staff understood they could only care for and support people who consented to being cared for.

People told us their regular care staff were kind and understood them well. The registered manager asked people about their preferences, likes and dislikes for care and support during their initial assessment of needs.

People told us staff respected their privacy, dignity and independence. People were confident any concerns or complaints would be listened to and action taken to resolve them.

People were encouraged to share their opinions about the quality of the service through surveys and conversations with a supervisor. Staff were supported by the registered manager, administrators and the out-of-hours on-call service to maintain the quality of the service.

The provider’s quality monitoring system included regular checks of people’s care plans and staff’s practice. When issues were identified the provider took action to improve the quality of the service.