Archived: CRG Homecare - Hampshire

Our inspection took place over two days. On the first day we visited the agency's office. We looked at documentation such as care plans, visit schedules, policies and procedures, training records, staff records, surveys and audit material. We spoke with the manager and area manager.

On the second day we visited and spoke with two people who used the service in their home. We spoke with four people who used the service in telephone interviews and four relatives. As part of our inspection process we also spoke with three care workers. This is a summary of what we found -

We considered our inspection findings to answer questions we always ask;

' Is the service safe?

' Is the service effective?

' Is the service caring?

' Is the service responsive?

' Is the service well led?

This is a summary of what we found '

Is the service safe?

The service was safe. We found people had an initial assessment of their needs and a care plan, including risk assessments. Records contained information about people's health and social care needs and daily notes showing how the care and support was delivered. One person we spoke with said: "I have a care plan here [at their home] and the staff look at it and they write notes about what they have done to help me" This meant that people's needs were assessed and care and treatment was planned and delivered in line with their individual care plan.

There were arrangements in place to deal with foreseeable emergencies. The provider used lap top computers and IT systems were backed up externally. These could be accessed from another location if the offices were not accessible due to an emergency situation.

The agency had a system in place for managing staffing emergencies. This ensured care and support would be provided when a care worker was absent at short notice. Members of the agency's management team provided cover and support throughout the working day.

Records were kept securely and could be located promptly when needed. Care workers told us that people's care records were located safely in the office and said they could access the documents when needed.

Is the service effective?

The service was effective. We saw records that showed care and support was personalised and contained step by step guidance on how people liked to be supported.

Records contained information about people's health and social care needs and daily notes showing how the care and support was delivered.

Is the service caring?

The service was caring. Each person we spoke with told us that care workers treated them with privacy, dignity and respect. Care workers told us they asked people when they were ready to receive personal care.

One person told us they had received support from the agency for about two years, they said: "I have had a few different agencies and this is the best one so far, they really do care and they are there for me when I need help".

Is the service responsive?

The service was responsive. People's care plans stated people's personal food and drink preferences as well as preferred name. We found that some people had details about their life history, like and dislikes.

Is the service well led?

The service was well led. CRG Homecare (Hampshire) supplied an information pack to everyone it provided a service to. The pack contained details about the type of support and help the agency could provide and included out of hours contact details.

We were able to see from records we reviewed that spot checks were undertaken on care workers monthly. These recorded if care workers had the correct uniform, identification and were carrying protective gloves and aprons. The spot check also recorded the conduct of the care worker and if they had treated the person with respect and dignity.

People confirmed that they had folders in their homes which they knew contained their care and support plans. One person who used the service said: "I am very pleased with my carer she is an angel" We looked at four care plans which described people's preferred routines and how the care was to be provided.

Staff training records showed that training in safeguarding of vulnerable adults was included in staff induction and it was updated annually. This meant that staff were given opportunities to review their knowledge and practices. One care worker we spoke with said: "I would have no hesitation at all in reporting any concerns I had to my manager".

We saw that Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks had been completed. There was a minimum of two references for each employee, together with proof of identity and right to work in the UK. We cross-referenced the DBS checks against the contract start dates and found that people did not start to work alone until the DBS checks were complete.

A system had been established to consult people about the quality of service received from the agency in their own homes and this was carried out at regular intervals through assignment reports.