Helping Hands Derby

Updated 6 November 2018

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.

We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection visit because it is small and we needed to be sure that someone would be in the office to meet with us.

Inspection site visit activity started on 12 September 2018 and ended on 17 September 2018. We visited the office location on 13 September 2018 to see the registered manager and office staff; and to review care records and policies and procedures. We undertook telephone calls to people using the service, their relatives and staff on 12 and 17 September 2018.

The inspection was carried out by one inspector and 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, the provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We received the completed document prior to our visit and reviewed the content to help focus our planning and determine the areas we needed to look at during our inspection. We reviewed the information we held about the service, including any notifications. Providers are required to notify CQC of any significant events or incidents that occur within the service.

During the inspection we spoke with six people who used the service and nine relatives. We also visited two people in their own homes. We met with the registered manager, the branch manager, the head of homecare, a quality assurance partner and spoke with four care staff. We looked at records relating to the personal care and support of five people using the service and their medicines records. We also looked at three staff recruitment records and other information related to the management oversight and governance of the service. This included quality assurance audits, staff training and supervision information, staffing rotas and the arrangements for managing complaints.

Updated 6 November 2018

This inspection took place on 12,13 and 17 September 2018. We gave short notice of the inspection because we needed to be sure the registered manager would be available to speak with us. This was the first inspection of the service since they registered with the Care Quality Commission.

This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats in the community. It provides a service to a range of people, including older people and people with physical disabilities. Not everyone using Helping Hands Derby receives a regulated activity; 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 was providing care and support to 60 people.

The service had a registered manager in post. 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.

People and relatives told us they had confidence and felt safe with staff from Helping Hands Derby. Staff demonstrated a good understanding of the various types of abuse and knew how to report any concerns. Managers provided regular training and guidance to support staff understanding of their role in protecting people from abuse.

Potential risks people were exposed to had been identified and reviewed. Risk assessments included detailed information and guidance to support staff to follow measures to reduce the risk of harm.

People received care from a consistent team of staff who arrived on time and stayed the full length of the call. There were robust recruitment processes in place. These helped to ensure staff were suitable to provide care and support. There were enough staff available to meet people's needs as assessed in their care plans.

Systems were in place to ensure staff followed safe infection control procedures to prevent the risk of infection when providing care. People received their medicines as prescribed.

There were arrangements in place for the service to make sure that action was taken and lessons learned when accidents or incidents occurred, to improve safety across the service.

People's needs and choices were assessed and their care provided in line with their wishes and preferences. Staff completed an induction process when they first started working in the service and on-going training and supervision. Training was reviewed and evaluated to ensure it was effective. This supported staff to gain the skills and knowledge they needed to provide care based on current practice.

People received support to have enough to eat and drink and were supported to maintain their health and well-being.

Staff demonstrated their understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. They gained people's consent before providing care and support.

People had positive, caring relationships with staff who knew them well and supported people to maintain their independence as far as possible. Staff were committed to protecting people's right to dignity and privacy and treated people with respect.

Care plans provided staff with detailed information and guidance about people's likes, dislikes and preferences. People and their relatives were involved in planning all aspects of their care and support and were able to make changes to how their care was provided. Records were regularly reviewed to ensure care met people's current needs. This helped to provide staff with the information they needed to provide care that was personalised for each individual.

Staff understood the risk of people becoming socially isolated and measures to reduce this were clearly included in people's care plans and the values in the care provided.

People concerns and complaints were listened to and responded to in order to improve the quality of care.

People, relatives and staff were able to express their views and opinions and were encouraged and supported to be involved in the development of the service. The management and leadership within the service had a clear structure. Staff felt supported and valued.

The provider had systems in place to monitor the quality and ensure the values, aims and objectives of the service were met. This included audits of key aspects of the service. Outcomes of quality assurance were used to critically review the service and drive improvements to develop the service.