Background to this inspection
Updated
9 December 2017
We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection checked 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 took place on 14 November 2017 and was announced. We gave the provider notice 48 hours before the inspection as the service provided personal care to people in their own homes and we wanted to be certain someone would be available to assist with the inspection.
The inspection visit was conducted by one inspector. Before the inspection we contacted people who used the service and their relatives for feedback. Some of these telephone calls were made by 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
Before the inspection visit we looked at all the information we held about the service. This included notifications of significant events and information we received about the provider during their registration. We spoke with seven people who used the service and fourteen relatives of other people who used the service. We received feedback by email from five care workers.
During the inspection visit we met the registered manager, care manager, care coordinator, supervisor, risk assessor and administrator. We looked at the care records for six people who used the service, the records of staff recruitment, support and training for five members of staff and other records the provider used for managing the service, which included records of complaints, quality monitoring, accidents and incidents and meeting minutes. The registered manager showed us the computerised system for recording care interventions and planning visits. We looked at the provider's training room and the resources used for training the staff.
Updated
9 December 2017
The inspection took place on 14 November 2017 and was announced. We gave the provider notice 48 hours before the inspection as the service provided personal care to people in their own homes and we wanted to be certain someone would be available to assist with the inspection.
This was the first inspection of the service since it was registered on 1 November 2016. The service previously operated under a different provider.
Time2Care Hillingdon Ltd is a domiciliary care agency providing personal care and support to people living in their own homes. At the time of the inspection 89 people were receiving a service. The majority were older people, some who were living with the experience of dementia. The provider also offered services to any adults needing care, including people with learning disabilities, physical disabilities, mental health needs and autism. This was the only location for the provider. All of the people using the service lived close to the location within the London Borough of Hillingdon or in Buckinghamshire.
The registered manager was also the owner of the company and the nominated individual. 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
People told us they were happy with the service they received. They had regular contact with the agency and felt that their needs and wishes were respected when care was planned. People told us they had good relationships with the care workers, who were kind, compassionate and respectful. Whilst people were happy with the care they received, a number of people commented that the care workers did not always arrive on time and were sometimes rushed. Records of care visits indicated that some people did not consistently receive visits at the same time each day. We spoke with the registered manager about this. They were aware that this had been an issue for some people and had a plan to make improvements in this area. The improvements included a new electronic call monitoring system which would track when visits were taking place in real time so lateness could be promptly identified and action taken to address it..
The staff who we spoke with told us they felt supported and had the training they needed. They told us that they could speak with the registered manager whenever they needed and they enjoyed their work. The staff had information about their roles and responsibilities and demonstrated a good understanding about key policies and procedures.
People were cared for in a safe way. The staff had assessed the risks to people's wellbeing. The assessments included plans telling the staff how people should be supported to minimise risks. The provider had procedures for safeguarding adults and for responding to accidents and incidents. There was evidence the provider had learnt from incidents and had changed practices to help protect people in the future. People received their medicines in a safe way and as prescribed. There were enough staff to meet people's needs and they had been recruited in a suitable way.
People's needs had been assessed and care had been planned in a way to meet these assessed needs. People had consented to their care and the provider was working within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. People were happy with the support they received at mealtimes. The staff monitored people's care and worked with other healthcare professionals to support people with their health needs.
The registered manager worked closely with the local authority, other providers and other professionals to make sure they were up to date with best practices. There were systems for monitoring the quality of the service and making improvements. Records were accurate, up to date and complete. The provider made use of technology to improve the way the service was run, for example by using electronic systems for informing the staff about changes to people's needs and care plans. There was a clear management structure and the senior staff knew their roles and responsibilities.