Exodus Homecare Agency Also known as Exodus Homecare Agency Ltd

Updated 3 September 2019

The inspection

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team

One inspector carried out this inspection.

Service and service type

Exodus Homecare Agency is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats.

The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

Notice of inspection

This inspection was announced. We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection. This was because it is a small service and we needed to be sure that the provider would be in the office to support the inspection.

Inspection activity started on 11 June 2019. We visited the office location on 11 June and made telephone calls to people and their relatives following our inspection.

What we did before the inspection

We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. We used the information the provider sent us in the provider information return. This is information providers are required to send us with key information about their service, what they do well, and improvements they plan to make. This information helps support our inspections. We used all this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection

We spoke with one person who used the service and three people’s relatives. We met the nominated individual during our site visit. The nominated individual is responsible for supervising the management of the service on behalf of the provider. The nominated manager was also the registered manager. Throughout the report we will refer to the nominated individual as the registered manager. We also spoke with the duty officer and the administration officer.

We reviewed a range of records. This included two people’s care records and associated records such as daily notes. We looked at one other person’s medicines records. We viewed three staff files in relation to recruitment and staff supervision. A variety of records relating to the management of the service, including policies and procedures were reviewed.

After the inspection

Following the inspection, we telephoned and attempted to speak with a care worker but were unsuccessful. We telephoned and spoke with the field officer.

We continued to seek clarification from the provider to validate evidence found. We looked at training data and quality assurance records.

Updated 3 September 2019

About the service

Exodus Homecare Agency is a domiciliary care agency providing personal care in people’s own homes. Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also consider any wider social care provided.

At the time of the inspection the agency was providing a service to five younger and older adults some of whom were living with dementia and some who had a disability.

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

We found that the not all staff recruitment was undertaken in a robust manner because the provider allowed staff to work prior to references being received. However, all other recruitment checks were undertaken. At the time of our inspection the provider had a limited team of care workers, however care calls were met because the nominated individual worked with people in their homes.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported support them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service did not support this practice. Most people using the service had capacity and had consented to their care and treatment. However, we found one instance where the provider was not working in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

People and their relatives spoke very positively about the care they received. They told us staff were very “kind” and “caring”. People’s communication support needs were recorded to ensure they could make informed choices.

People had person centred care plans that specified how they wanted their care provided. Care plans were reviewed on a regular basis to ensure they were still relevant to the person.

People using the service and their relatives felt safe. The registered manager assessed people prior to offering a placement and put in measures to address any risks to the person.

Staff supported people to have choice and control of their lives and respected their dignity and privacy; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Why we inspected

This service had been dormant. This meant they had not been providing care to anyone. Therefore, this is the first inspection under our new methodology ratings.

You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

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.