You are here

Fusco Browne Healthcare Limited Good

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 3 July 2018

This inspection took place on 13 June 2018 and was announced. The registered provider was given short notice of our inspection. We did this because the service is small and the manager was sometimes out of the office and we needed to be sure that they would be available.

Fusco Browne is a small domiciliary care service registered to provide personal care for people living in their own homes in the community. At time of the inspection the service was providing a home care service to 13 people.

There was a manager at the service who was registered with CQC, but they had recently left the service. They were in the process of cancelling their registration. A new manager had been appointed and had been working at the service for approximately a month. 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.

We saw there was sufficient staff to provide regular care workers to people using the service. People received care from the same group of care workers. People we spoke with were satisfied with the quality of care they had received and made positive comments about the staff.

Relatives we spoke with were satisfied with the quality of care their family member had received. Relatives also made positive comments about the staff and the senior managers.

Staff had undertaken safeguarding training and so they understood their role and responsibilities in keeping people safe from harm.

We saw people were cared for by suitably qualified staff who had been assessed as safe to work with people.

There were systems in place to ensure people received medicines at the time they needed them.

People had risk assessments in place, to ensure that potential risks to people were managed and minimised whilst still promoting independence.

The service had a process in place for staff to record accidents and untoward occurrences. The nominated individual told us the occurrences were monitored to identify any trends and prevent recurrences where possible.

We saw the service was in the process of reviewing their care planning documentation. We saw the level of detail varied in people’s care plans. We saw some care plans were very detailed and person centred.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible.

Staff were supported to deliver care and treatment safely and to an appropriate standard. Staff had undertaken relevant training to ensure they had the skills and knowledge to carry out their roles.

We saw there was a robust complaints process in place at the service. Concerns were recorded, responded to and action taken to address those concerns.

The leadership and culture of the service promoted the delivery of high quality care.

People and relatives we spoke highly of the staff and the service as a whole.

There were regular checks completed by senior staff to assess and improve the quality of the service provided.

The service sought the views of people and their representatives to continuously improve the service.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 3 July 2018

The service was safe.

People we spoke with told us they felt “safe” and had no worries or concerns.

We found there were arrangements in place to ensure people received medicines at the right time.

We found there was sufficient staff to meet people’s needs.

Staff had undertaken safeguarding training.

Effective

Good

Updated 3 July 2018

The service was effective.

Relatives made positive comments about the care their family member had received.

Staff had undertaken training to ensure they had the skills and knowledge to support people effectively.

We saw staff received appropriate support to enable them to carry out their duties.

Caring

Good

Updated 3 July 2018

The service was caring.

People made positive comments about the staff and told us they were treated with dignity and respect.

Relatives made positive comments about the staff and told us their family member was treated with dignity and respect.

Staff enjoyed working at the service. Staff told us they always asked people for consent prior to supporting them.

Responsive

Good

Updated 3 July 2018

People were supported with their health and dietary needs, where this was part of their plan of care.

Care staff were able to describe the steps they would take if a person became unwell to ensure they received medical assistance if needed.

People and relatives were confident that if they raised any concerns or complaints, these would be taken seriously and appropriate action taken.

The service had a robust complaints process in place.

Well-led

Good

Updated 3 July 2018

The service was well-led.

People and relatives made positive comments about how the service was run.

There was clear leadership in place.

There were processes in place to ensure the quality and safety of the service was monitored.