You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 5 October 2018

Healthy Care 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 four older adults and younger disabled adults.

This inspection took place on 15, 22 and 23 August 2018. The inspection was announced. This is the first Care Quality Commission (CQC) inspection since the service registered on 25 August 2017.

Not everyone using Healthy Care received 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.

There was 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.’

Staff followed the providers medication policy and people were having their medication as prescribed. Although, there was no evidence of people being placed at risk, some records lacked guidance for staff on whose responsibility it was to order, collect and dispose of people’s medication.

People were supported by staff who knew about how to protect people from abuse and harm. Staff also knew how to report concerns. People’s risk management plans provided guidance and information for staff on how to reduce and monitor people’s assessed risks to their health and welfare. However, although staff new people’s risks, documented guidance for staff around the risks posed by people’s specific health care conditions needed more detail as information for staff. People’s care records were held securely within the office to ensure confidentiality and a copy was held within people’s own homes.

People had no missed care visits and staff arrived at people’s care visits on time, or within the agreed plus or minus 15 minutes tolerance. People received a kind and compassionate service from staff who knew them well. Staff maintained people’s privacy and dignity when supporting them with their personal care. People were assisted by staff, where needed, with their eating and drinking to promote their well-being.

People had technology and equipment in place to help staff assist them to receive safe care and support. When things did not go as planned, the registered manager took actions to prevent these events from happening again.

New staff had recruitment checks completed on them prior to starting work at the service. Staff were trained to meet people’s care and support needs and development opportunities were in place for staff to increase their skills and knowledge. Supervisions and competency checks were in place to monitor and develop staff.

Personal protective equipment was in place for staff to maintain infection prevention and control when supporting people.

People were involved in their care decisions and staff promoted people’s independence as far as practicable. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible.

Where people were at the end of their life staff would work in partnership with other healthcare professionals to ensure people’s care was dignified and comfortable.

People were happy with how their complaints were managed, responded to and resolved where possible. The registered manager and deputy manager led by example and encouraged an open and honest culture within their staff team. Audit and governance systems were in place and were in the process of being improved so that they could drive forward any improvements required. The registered manager and their staff team linked up and worked with other organisations to ensure people’s well-being.

Further information is in the detailed findings

Inspection areas

Safe

Requires improvement

Updated 5 October 2018

The service was not always safe.

People’s prescribed medication was safely managed. Clearer records were needed to clarify staff responsibility around the ordering, collecting and disposal of people’s medication.

Risks to people were monitored by staff to ensure that people remained safe, but promoted people’s independence wherever possible. More guidance for staff was required around people’s specific health conditions.

A process was in place and followed by staff, to protect people from harm or poor care.

People received their care visits at the agreed time.

Effective

Good

Updated 5 October 2018

The service was effective.

Staff were supported with training, spot checks and supervisions to make sure they were delivering effective care.

Staff supported people with their eating and drinking requirements.

People were assisted to have access to external healthcare services when needed.

Caring

Good

Updated 5 October 2018

The service was caring.

Staff treated the people they supported in a compassionate manner and with respect.

People were supported to be involved in making decisions about their care and support needs.

Staff maintained people’s privacy and dignity when supporting them.

Responsive

Good

Updated 5 October 2018

The service was responsive.

People’s individual needs were assessed and staff used this information to deliver personalised care to people.

People’s suggestions were listened to and implemented wherever possible.

Well-led

Good

Updated 5 October 2018

The service was well-led.

Staff were clear about the standard of care and support they were expected to deliver.

Quality monitoring was in place and was in the process of being improved to oversee the service provided.

People, their relatives’ and staff were encouraged to feed back on the quality of care provided.