You are here

Phoenix Care (Havering) Limited Good

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 9 August 2018

We carried out an announced inspection of Phoenix Care (Havering) Limited on 18 July 2018. Phoenix Care (Havering) Limited is registered to provide personal care to people in their own homes. The CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also take into account any wider social care provided. At the time of our inspection, the service provided personal care to six people in their homes. This was the first inspection of the service since it registered with the CQC.

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 legal requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and the associated regulations on how the service is run.

Some risks to people were not always robustly managed. We found some care plans did not contain suitable and sufficient risk assessments to effectively manage risks. We made a recommendation in this area.

Quality assurance and monitoring systems were in place to ensure there was a culture of continuous improvements. However, this had not identified the shortfalls we found in relation to risk assessments. The registered manager informed us that they would ensure the systems would be made more robust.

Formal 1:1 supervisions of staff had not been completed regularly in accordance to the providers supervision policy, to ensure staff felt supported at all times. We made a recommendation in this area.

Staff had been trained in the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and were aware of the principles of the act. Assessments had been carried out to determine people’s ability to make specific decisions in accordance to the MCA principles.

Staff were aware of how to identify abuse and knew who to report abuse to, both within the organisation and externally.

There were arrangements in place to ensure staff attended care visits on time. Staff told us they had time to provide person centred care and the service had enough staff to support people.

Medicines were managed safely. We found that people’s Medicine Administration Records (MAR) had been completed accurately. Medicines was being administered as instructed on people’s MAR, or in accordance with the provider’s policy.

Pre-employment checks had been carried out in full to ensure staff were suitable to provide care and support to people safely.

Staff had been trained to perform their roles effectively. Staff had also received specialist training to help support people with complex care needs.

Pre-assessment forms had been completed to assess people’s needs and their background before they started using the service. Reviews were held regularly to identify people’s current preferences and support needs.

People were being cared for by staff who felt supported by the management team.

People were supported to access healthcare if needed. Staff knew if people were not feeling well and who to report to.

People’s privacy and dignity were respected by staff. Relatives told us that staff were caring and they had a good relationship with them.

Staff, people and relatives were positive about the management team. People’s feedback was sought from surveys.

No complaints had been received but complaint forms were available and staff were aware of how to manage complaints.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 9 August 2018

The service was safe.

Some risks assessments had not been completed for people with identified risks.

Medicines were managed safely.

Pre-employment checks had been carried out to ensure staff were suitable to care for people safely.

Staff were aware of safeguarding procedures and knew how to identify and report abuse.

There were appropriate staffing arrangements to ensure staff attended care visits.

Appropriate infection control arrangements were in place.

Effective

Good

Updated 9 August 2018

The service was effective.

Staff received essential training needed to care for people effectively.

Assessments had been carried out using the MCA principles to determine if people had capacity to make certain decisions. Staff had been trained on the MCA and requested people�s consent before carrying out tasks.

People�s needs and choices were assessed effectively to achieve effective outcomes.

Staff were supported to carry out their roles. However, formal 1:1 supervisions were not carried out regularly.

People had access to healthcare services when required.

Caring

Good

Updated 9 August 2018

The service was caring.

Staff had positive relationships with people and were caring.

People and their relatives were involved in decision making on the support people received.

People�s privacy and dignity was respected.

Responsive

Good

Updated 9 August 2018

The service was responsive

Care plans were person centred and included people�s support needs.

Staff had a good understanding of people�s needs and preferences.

Staff knew how to manage complaints. People and relatives had access to complaint forms should they need to make a complaint.

Well-led

Requires improvement

Updated 9 August 2018

The service was not always well-led.

The quality systems in place had not identified the shortfalls we found during the inspection.

Staff, professionals and relatives were positive about the management team.

People�s feedback about the service was obtained from surveys.