Updated 5 July 2022
We carried out this performance review and assessment under Section 46 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act). We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements of the regulations associated with the Act and looked at the quality of the service to provide a rating.
Unlike our standard approach to assessing performance, we did not physically visit the office of the location. This is a new approach we have introduced to reviewing and assessing performance of some care at home providers. Instead of visiting the office location we use technology such as electronic file sharing and video or phone calls to engage with people using the service and staff.
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.
Service and service type
This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats.
This service is required to have a registered manager. The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. They were also the provider. This meant they were 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 we needed to be sure that the provider or management would be available to support the inspection.
Inspection activity started on 31 May 2022 and ended on 24 June 2022 when we gave feedback.
What we did before the inspection
We reviewed our systems and information we held about the service. We used the information the provider sent us in the provider information return (PIR). This is information providers are required to send us annually with key information about their service, what they do well, and improvements they plan to make. We took this into account when we inspected the service and made judgements in this report.
During the inspection
This performance review and assessment was carried out without a visit to the location’s office. We used technology such as video calls to enable us to engage with the management of the service and electronic file sharing to enable us to review documentation. We carried out telephone interviews with people who used the service, relatives and staff.
In our telephone interviews we spoke with three care staff, four people who used the service and five relatives about their experience of Proficient Community Care Services.
We received electronic feedback from one relative, six members of staff, a social worker and the local authority commissioning team who work with the service.
We reviewed a range of records which included risk assessments, medication records for three people and three staff recruitment records. We also viewed some of the provider’s policies and procedures, quality assurance records, training data, monitoring and oversight records.