You are here

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


Inspection carried out on 22 July 2019

During a routine inspection

About the service

Brand Healthcare 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. At the time of the inspection there were six people receiving personal care from the service.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

Relatives of people using the service told us they were happy with the care and support provided. They told us they felt the service was safe. Systems were in place to protect people against the risk of abuse. Risk assessments were completed to identify and manage risks to keep people safe. People were supported to take their medicines and measures were in place to protect people from the spread of infection. There were enough staff available to meet people’s needs. Pre-employment checks had been carried out to ensure staff were suitable to support people.

The service carried out assessments of people’s needs prior to the provision of care and support to ensure they could meet their needs. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. Staff had completed required training to perform their roles effectively and felt supported in their role. Staff supported people to eat and drink enough to meet their needs. The service worked with other agencies to promote people’s health, safety and wellbeing.

People received care and support from staff who were caring and compassionate. Staff treated people in a caring and respectful manner maintaining their dignity and encouraging independence. Staff knew people well and understood the importance of meeting their needs and preferences. People’s privacy and confidentiality were respected.

Support plans were person-centred and included the individual needs of people. Support plans were subject to review to ensure they accurately reflected peoples changing needs. Complaints procedures were in place and people and their relatives were provided with a copy of the procedure.

People and staff told us they found the registered manager and management team approachable and supportive. Systems were in place for quality assurance and quality monitoring to ensure people received high quality care.

Rating at last inspection and update

The last rating for this service was Requires Improvement (published 13 June 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.

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.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at

Inspection carried out on 1 May 2018

During a routine inspection

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.