• Services in your home
  • Homecare service

Hanwell Community Centre

Overall: Good

Westcott Crescent, London, W7 1PD (020) 8575 6661

Provided and run by:
Support Direct Limited

Latest inspection summary

On this page

Background to this inspection

Updated 26 May 2018

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This inspection took place on 8 March 2018 and was announced. We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection visit because it is small and the manager is often out of the office supporting staff or providing care. We needed to be sure that they would be in.

The inspection team consisted of an inspector and an expert-by-experience. An expert by experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

Prior to this inspection, we reviewed information we held about the service. This included previous inspection reports, the provider’s action plan that told us how they intended to address the breaches found at the previous inspection and notifications we had received. A notification is information about important events and incidents that the provider is required to send us by law.

We reviewed four people's care records. This included associated documents such as risk assessments, recording charts and daily notes. We also reviewed four people’s medicines records.

During the inspection, we reviewed four staff personnel records, including their recruitment and training documentation. We spoke with four care staff, the care coordinator, the administration and financial assistant, the operations manager, and the registered manager. Following our inspection, we spoke with eight people who used the service and five people’s relatives.

Overall inspection


Updated 26 May 2018

At our inspection in December 2016, we found two breaches of the regulations in relation to Safe care and treatment and Good governance and the service was rated Requires improvement. This was because there were errors in the recording of medicines administration and risks to people were not assessed in an individualised and person centred manner. In addition, the oversight and monitoring of safeguarding concerns, accidents and incidents and complaints was not robust.

Following the last inspection, the provider sent us an action plan and told us they would make all the necessary improvements by June 2017. At this inspection we found the provider has made the improvements they said they would make.

This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats in the They provide a service to older adults some of whom are living with dementia. A service is also provided to people with mental health concerns and younger disabled adults who may have learning disabilities, physical disabilities, sensory impairments and people who misuse drugs and alcohol.

Not everyone using Hanwell Community Centre 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. At the time of our inspection, the provider was offering personal care support to 81 people.

There was a registered manager in post. A registered 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.

During our inspection we found that the provider had made improvements to the risk assessment process. People’s risk assessments were more person centred. A new risk assessment format was being implemented and this supported staff to consider the individual. We noted that not all people had been assessed using the new format and some risk assessments were still written by hand which made it more difficult for staff to read. We brought this to the registered manager’s attention who agreed to address this.

Care staff had received medicines administration refresher training. We checked medicines administration and found that medicines were being administered appropriately by staff. The manager and service manager audited the medicines administration records to ensure staff were competent to manage people’s medicines.

The provider had taken action to improve their oversight and analysis of safeguarding concerns, accidents, incidents, and complaints. They had employed an administrator who had created a database to ensure that each concern was reported appropriately, investigated and the outcome evaluated.

During our last inspection, we found that some staff did not have a good command of English. We found that the provider now requested new staff to undertake a spoken English and literacy test before they were employed, to ensure their competency to communicate effectively with people receiving a service.

Auditing of the service has improved and the database prompted office staff to undertake people’s reviews in a timely manner, and highlighting when staff supervision sessions and training were due.

People and their relatives all spoke very positively about the service they received from the provider. Their comments included that care staff as, “Gentle and patient” and “Kind and friendly.” They found the office staff approachable and responsive and knew how to raise concerns and make complaints.

Care staff spoke positively about the people and told us how they offered choices to people and supported their wishes. They had guidance about how to communicate with people and took time to get to know people they worked with.

The provider had systems in place for the safe recruitment of staff and there were enough staff that were deployed to meet the needs of the people using the service.

Staff told us they were well supported and had received training to support them to undertake their role.

The provider was working under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and staff could tell us about their responsibilities to support people to make decisions.

The provider prior to a service commencing assessed people’s needs and prepared person centred care plans that gave staff guidance as to how care and support should be provided.