You are here

Noble Care Alliances Ltd Good


Inspection carried out on 11 December 2018

During a routine inspection

This inspection took place on 11 December 2018 and was announced as this is a domiciliary care company and we had to be certain someone would be in. This was the first time the service had been inspected by 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 older adults. At the time of inspection two people were receiving a service from Noble Care Alliances LTD. The service employed four staff including the registered manager.

Everyone using Noble Care Alliances LTD receives 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.

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. The service had a registered manager.

At the time of inspection, the registered manager was being counted as a staff member due to staff annual leave to ensure that the people received their service. The registered manager was attempting to recruit staff. This impacted the ability of the registered manager to carry out their manager responsibilities such as appropriately documenting actions that have been taken resulting from audits, the completion of induction and recruitment paperwork.

There had not been any accidents or incidents reported however the provider had a policy in place for staff to reference. The provider had systems in place to ensure that people were protected from the risk of harm or abuse. We saw there were policies and procedures in place to guide staff in relation to safeguarding adults and whistleblowing. Good practice guidance surrounding reporting safeguarding concerns was also included in staff meetings.

We found that people’s needs had been assessed and planned for and that a range of risk assessments had been completed to ensure staff were aware of how to keep both them and people using the service safe. Care plans were detailed, person centred and gave in-depth guidance to staff on how people wanted to be supported. We found that people were involved in decisions about their care and support and their care reviews.

Staff supported people with their medication when necessary and assisted people to maintain good nutritional intake and hydration to safeguard their health and well-being.

An accessible complaints procedure had been developed and people had been provided with a copy of the complaints procedure for reference. People told us they knew how to complain in the event they needed to raise a concern.

Recruitment practices were in place which included the completion of pre-employment checks prior to a new member of staff working at the service and staff received regular training and supervision to enable them to work safely and effectively.

Staff had access to gloves and aprons and had received training about health and safety and food hygiene this meant the infection control standards of the service were of a good standard.

The provider had developed a policy and obtained guidance for staff relating to the Mental Capacity Act 2005. People told us that they were empowered to exercise choice and control over their lives and valued the opportunity to live independently in their own homes.