We carried out a review of the data available to us about Human Support Group Limited - Stoke on Trent on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Human Support Group Limited - Stoke on Trent, you can give feedback on this service.
Human Support Group Limited – Stoke on Trent is a domiciliary care agency providing personal care to 73 people at the time of the inspection.
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.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People felt safe using the service because they had a regular group of care staff who got to know them well. Staff knew people and how to manage their risks.
People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm because a suitable system was operated to keep people safe. Staff understood their responsibilities. People were protected from the spread of infection and the provider had ensured practice was updated during the COVID-19 pandemic.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
Staff were safely recruited and inducted. They had access to training and supervision to ensure they had the skills to support people effectively. People’s needs and choices were assessed and planned for. Staff worked alongside health professionals and made referrals when required to ensure people had holistic care.
There was a registered manager who was approachable and supportive. They had made improvements since the last inspection and people told us they were happy with the care they received. Staff enjoyed working at the service and were listened to. There were systems in place that worked to ensure areas of improvements were identified and actions were taken to make changes when needed so that people had good quality care.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection and update
The last rating for this service was requires improvement (published 22 November 2019) and there were two breaches of regulation. The provider completed an action plan after the last inspection to show what they would do and by when to improve. At this inspection we found improvements had been made and the provider was no longer in breach of regulations.
Why we inspected
We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection of this service between 9-11 October 2019. Breaches of legal requirements were found. The provider completed an action plan after the last inspection to show what they would do and by when to improve safe care and treatment and good governance.
We undertook this focused inspection to check they had followed their action plan and to confirm they now met legal requirements. This report only covers our findings in relation to the Key Questions Safe and Well-led which contain those requirements. We also inspected the Key Question Effective, to look for improvements.
The ratings from the previous comprehensive inspection for those key questions not looked at on this occasion were used in calculating the overall rating at this inspection. The overall rating for the service has changed from requires improvement to good. This is based on the findings at this inspection.
You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Human Support Group Limited Stoke on Trent 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.
The Human Support Group Stoke is a domiciliary care agency providing personal care to 54 people some of which may have been living with dementia and physical health issues at the time of the inspection.
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.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
Risk’s to people were not always suitably assessed and planned for. For example, where people had diabetes, or was at risk of choking, there was no specific guidance in place for staff to follow. There was no guidance in place for staff to follow when people had ‘as and when required’ medication. This was a breach of regulation 12 (Safe Care and Treatment) of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.
Despite what we found people told us they felt safe and were happy with their regular carers but when they did not attend, their call times could vary, which caused frustration for people. Staff were safely recruited, and people were protected from the risk of cross infection. The service had systems and processes in place to safeguard people from the risk of potential abuse.
Governance systems were not established or used effectively to ensure people received good quality care. This was a breach of regulation 17 (Good governance) of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. The provider worked in partnership with others and the regional manager was aware of their duty of candour.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; however, the policies and systems in the service did not support this practice.
People had their needs assessed, however, support plans lacked detail on how to effectively support the person in line with their support needs. Staff did receive training in their role, however the service said it supported people with a range of different support needs and training provided did not cover these areas. Although guidance for staff was lacking for people who had dietary requirements, people told us they were happy with the way staff supported them.
People’s end of life wishes were not recorded. This meant people may not be supported in line with their wishes or preferences. Care plans did not consistently identify people’s preferences, however when people did receive their regular carers people felt staff knew them well. The service was meeting people’s communication needs and had a complaints policy in place.
People were supported by caring staff and were supported to express their views in making decisions about their care. People’s dignity was respected, and their independence promoted.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection
The last rating for this service was good (published 22 April 2017).
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
Enforcement
We have identified breaches in relation to safe care and treatment and good governance at this inspection.
Please see the action we have told the provider to take at the end of this report.
Follow up
We will request an action plan for the provider to understand what they will do to improve the standards of quality and safety. We will work alongside the provider and local authority to monitor progress. We will return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.
Our last inspection took place in November 2015 and the service was given an overall rating of Requires Improvement. Improvements were required within our questions of Safe and Well-led as some care records did not show how risks relating to people’s care was managed and effective systems to monitor the quality of the service were not in place. On this inspection we saw improvements had been made in these areas.
The service had a registered manager. 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.
We found improvements had been made with how incidents had been investigated. Where incidents had occurred, these had been reviewed and the provider had taken necessary action to make changes to ensure improvements were made. Quality assurance systems had been developed to monitor how the service was delivered and people were able to comment on the quality of the service. Where people raised concerns these were addressed and changes made to people’s satisfaction.
People felt safe and staff were trained in safeguarding adults and understood how to protect people from abuse. Where risks had been identified, measures were taken to reduce or prevent potential risks to people. Recruitment checks were carried out prior to staff starting work to ensure their suitability to work with people who used the service.
Staff sought people’s consent before they provided care and support and people were involved in the planning and reviewing of their care. People were treated with dignity and respect by staff who understood the importance of this. People had support to take their medicines at the right time and staff knew how to act if medicines were missed. Where assistance was required, people received support to prepare and eat their meals and had access to food and drink between support visits.
The staff were kind and caring and had the right skills and experience to provide the care and support they required. People benefitted from receiving a service from staff who worked in an open and friendly culture and were happy in their work and supported by senior staff. Staff received supervision to ensure they were competent in their role. There were enough suitably trained staff to deliver safe and effective care to people. People had consistent staff to provide their care and who stayed the agreed length of time and changes were being made to ensure the times suited people.
People knew how to make a complaint if they needed to. People were confident they could raise any concerns or issues with staff in the office and the registered manager, knowing they would be listened to and acted on.
We inspected the Human Support Group Limited, Stoke-on-Trent on 5 November 2015. This service is also known as Home Care Support – Stoke. The provider is a domiciliary care service, registered to provide personal care to people living their own homes. At the time of our inspection, 101 people used the service.
There was a registered manager in post. 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
The location was registered with us in June 2013 and had never been inspected before.
People were at risk of unsafe care because care records did not always provide clear guidance to staff on how care should be delivered. Risk management plans were not always in place to guide staff on how to provide safe care.
The provider had systems in place to regularly monitor the quality of services provided. However, care support staff did not always receive feedback of quality to monitoring audits from the main office, so lessons were not always shared and learned. The registered manager did not always notify us of events which they are required to notify us about.
All the people we spoke with told us they felt safe and protected from harm. They were confident that staff would take appropriate action if they were at risk of harm or the staff member suspected abuse. Staff understood what constituted abuse and knew what actions to take if abuse was suspected.
There were appropriate numbers of staff employed to meet people’s needs. People’s care needs were planned and reviewed regularly to meet their needs.
People were assessed before they started using the service to identify if their needs could be met by the provider. Staff had the knowledge and skills for caring and supporting people.
Legal requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) were followed when people were unable to make certain decisions about their care. The MCA provides a legal framework for making particular decisions on behalf of people who may lack the mental capacity to do so for themselves.
People told us the staff supported them to eat and drink sufficient amounts if they needed support. They told us that staff took appropriate action if they had concerns that they were not eating and drinking well. Other health and social care professionals were contacted when staff had concerns about people’s health and wellbeing.
People were involved in the care planning process and in decisions about their care and treatment. They told us, and we saw that staff were kind and treated them with dignity and respect.
Care was tailored to meet people’s individual needs. Care plans detailed how people wished to be supported. There were systems in place to support people if they wished to complain or raise concerns about the service.
We saw that the registered manager was accessible and people felt free to approach them if they had any concerns. The registered manager understood their responsibilities And supported staff in their roles.