Background to this inspection
Updated
11 June 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. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.
Inspection team:
The inspection was conducted by one inspector. An expert by experience made phone calls to people, relatives, staff and professionals to ask their opinions about the service provided. An expert by experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.
Service and service type:
Alpha May is a domiciliary care provider in Brighton, East Sussex, which is situated close to the coast. Not everyone using Alpha May received the regulated activity ‘Personal care’ that CQC inspects, which includes support with personal hygiene, eating and drinking. Where they do we also take into account any wider social care provided. At the time of inspection, two people were receiving a regulated activity.
The service did not have a manager currently registered with the Care Quality Commission. A registered manager 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. The current manager had recently applied with CQC to become registered.
Notice of inspection:
We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection site visit. This is because we wanted to gain consent from people to receive phone calls from the expert by experience.
The inspection took place on 24 April 2019. We visited the office location on this date to see the manager and office staff; and to review care records and policies and procedures.
What we did:
Before the inspection, we reviewed information we had received about the service. This included details about incidents the provider must notify us about. We also used information the provider sent us in the Provider Information Return [PIR]. This is information we require providers to send us at least once annually to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.
During the inspection we looked at rotas and contingency plans, quality assurance processes and records of accidents, incidents and complaints. We reviewed two people's care records and three staff files. This included information about recruitment, training and supervision. We also spoke with two people using the service, two relatives, a health professional, the provider, manager and two members of care staff.
Updated
11 June 2019
About the service:
Alpha May is a small domiciliary care provider that was providing personal care to two people with physical support needs in their homes, at the time of the inspection.
Not everyone using Alpha May received the regulated activity ‘Personal care’ that CQC inspects, which includes support with personal hygiene, eating and drinking. Where they do we also take into account any wider social care provided.
People’s experience of using this service:
People told us they felt safe with staff. Risks to people were identified and reviewed regularly with people, their relatives and health and social care professionals.
People received support from the same staff each week which meant care was provided consistently. There were enough staff to meet people’s needs and no care calls had been missed since the service opened.
Staff were recruited safely. They had a good understanding of safeguarding, potential signs of abuse and of who they would need to report any concerns to.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. The policies and processes in the service supported this practice.
People, their relatives and a professional told us that staff had a thorough knowledge of them and their needs. Staff received regular supervision and spot checks to support them within their role.
People had access to health and social care professionals to improve their well-being. Staff supported them where necessary to appointments and had effective communication with professionals. People’s nutritional and hydration needs were also met.
Everyone we spoke to was consistent in their views that staff were kind, caring and respectful towards people. People told us they had built strong relationships with staff who they felt, “Genuinely cared about them.” They said staff took time to get to know them, their preferences and routines and this made them feel valued.
Staff knew people’s communication needs well and regularly sought their views of the service provided. Although no complaints had been received, people told us they knew how to raise concerns and would have no issues doing this with the manager.
People, their relatives, staff and a professional told us the manager had a good understanding of people, was professional and ensured the service was well-led. Although the service was small the manager and provider were aware of what was needed to ensure care remained consistent, as the service grew.
The provider and manager understood the value of working in partnership with others and had already started building relationships with other services, to benefit staff and people.
Rating at last inspection:
This was Alpha May’s first inspection since being registered.
Why we inspected:
We inspected the service as part of our inspection methodology for new services.
Follow up:
We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received we may inspect sooner.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk