You are here

Brand Healthcare Requires improvement

This service was previously registered at a different address - see old profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Requires improvement

Updated 19 June 2018

This inspection took place over two days on the 1 and 2 May 2018. This was the first inspection of the service since it was registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) in April 2017.

This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats. It provides a service to older adults and younger disabled adults. At the time of our visit 13 people were using the service.

The service had a registered manager in place. 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.

During this inspection we found two breaches of regulations. This was because there were not systems in place to ensure people were always safe and quality assurance and monitoring systems were not always effective. We also made one recommendation that care plans include details of people’s previous life history. You can see what action we have asked the provider to take at the end of the full version of this report.

People told us they felt safe using the service. Risk assessments were in place setting out how to support people safely. Systems had been established to prevent the spread of infection. Although the service did not have a complete record of staff's employment history other checks had been carried out including criminal record checks and employment references. Systems were in place to help reduce the risk of spread of infection, for example staff wore protective clothing when providing support with personal care.

People’s needs were assessed before they began using the service. Staff received training and supervision to support them in their role. New staff undertook an induction training programme on commencing work at the service. People were able to make choices for themselves where they had the capacity to do so and the service operated in line the Mental Capacity Act 2005. People were supported to access relevant health care professionals and staff knew how to respond if a person was unwell..

People told us they were treated with respect and that staff were caring. Staff had a good understanding of how to promote people’s privacy, independence and dignity. People were provided with the same regular support staff. Systems were in place to ensure people's confidentiality was promoted, such as ensuring records were stored securely.

Care plans were in place which set out how to meet people’s individual needs and these were subject to review. They were personalised around the needs of the individuals. The service had a complaints procedure in place and people knew how to make a complaint and complaints had been responded to in line with the policy. Where people received support with end of life care, care plans were in place and the service worked with other agencies as appropriate.

People and staff spoke positively about the registered manager and systems were in place for seeking the views of people who used the service. People told us the registered manager was approachable and accessible.

Inspection areas

Safe

Requires improvement

Updated 19 June 2018

The service was not always safe. We found concerns with the systems for monitoring that staff attended all appointments and the way medicines were recorded. The service did not always maintain a record of staff’s previous employment history.

There were enough staff to meet people’s needs and people told us staff were usually punctual.

Risk assessments were in place which set out how to support people in a safe way.

Systems were in place tom reduce the risk of the spread of infection.

Effective

Good

Updated 19 June 2018

The service was effective. People’s needs were assessed before they began using the service.

Staff undertook regular training to support them in their role. Staff had regular one to one supervision meetings.

People were able to make choices about their care and the service operated within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

People were supported to access relevant health care professionals as required.

Caring

Good

Updated 19 June 2018

The service was caring. People told us they were treated with respect by staff and that staff were friendly and caring.

Staff had a good understanding of how to promote people’s dignity, privacy and independence.

People were supported by the same regular care staff.

We have made a recommendation that care plans include details of people’s previous life history.

Responsive

Good

Updated 19 June 2018

The service was responsive. Care plans were in place which set out how to meet people’s needs in a personalised manner. Care plans were subject to regular review.

The service had a complaints procedure in place and people knew how to make a complaint.

The service was able to meet people’s end of life care needs where appropriate.

Well-led

Requires improvement

Updated 19 June 2018

The service was not always safe. Quality assurance and monitoring systems were in place, but they were not always effective. There were instances of poor record keeping.

The service had a registered manager in place and people and staff spoke positively about the senior staff.

Systems were in place for seeking the views of people who used the service.