Archived: Dial House Home Care

The inspection was carried out by one inspector.

Dial House Homecare is a domiciliary care service that is registered to provide personal care. This domiciliary care service enables people to continue living independently in their own home. Care is also provided at an independent living scheme, where carers are based on site during the day to provide extra care. At the time of the inspection 63 people were using 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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People felt safe. Staff had received training to enable them to recognise signs and symptoms of abuse and knew how to report them, protecting people from avoidable harm and abuse.

People had risk assessments in place to enable them to be as independent as they could be whilst being kept safe.

There were sufficient staff, with the correct skill mix, on duty to support people with their needs.

Effective recruitment processes were in place and followed by the service to ensure staff employed were suitable for the role.

Medicines were managed safely. The processes in place ensured that the administration and handling of medicines was suitable for the people who used the service.

Staff received a comprehensive induction process and on-going training. They were well supported by the registered manager and had regular one to one time for supervisions and annual appraisals.

Staff had attended a variety of training to ensure they were able to provide care based on current practice when supporting people.

Staff gained consent before supporting people and had signed consent within their care plans. People were supported to make decisions about all aspects of their life; this was underpinned by the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.

People were able to make choices about the food and drink they had, and staff assisted when required.

People were supported to access a variety of additional health professionals when required. Staff provided care and support in a caring and meaningful way. They knew the people who used the service well. People and relatives, where appropriate, were involved in the planning of their care and support. People’s privacy and dignity was maintained at all times.

A complaints procedure was in place and accessible to all. People knew how to complain. Effective quality monitoring systems were in place. A variety of audits were carried out and used to drive improvement.

A breach of legal requirement was found. After the comprehensive inspection, the registered person wrote to us to say what they would do to meet the legal requirement relating to Regulation 18 of the Care Quality Commission (Registration) Regulations 2009. This was to ensure that notifiable incidents relating to people's safety and well-being would be submitted to the Care Quality Commission.

We undertook this unannounced focussed inspection on 16 August 2016. The inspection was carried out by one inspection.

We checked that the registered manager had followed their plan to ensure that the service now met legal requirements. This report only covers our findings in relation to that requirement. You can read the full report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the 'all reports' link for Dial House Home Care on our website at www.cqc.org.uk

Dial House Home Care provides personal care and support to people living in their own homes. At the time of our inspection the service was providing care and support to 85 people. Visits ranged from 15 minutes up to two hours. The frequency of visits consisted of one visit per week to four visits per day, depending on people's individual needs.

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.

During this inspection, we found that the provider was now ensuring that notifiable incidents relating to people's safety and well-being were reported to the Care Quality Commission in line with their registration requirements.

While improvements had been made we have not revised the rating for this domain. To improve the rating to 'Good' would require consistent good practice over a longer time period. We will review our rating for well-led at the next comprehensive inspection.

Dial House Home Care provides personal care and support to people living in their own homes. At the time of our inspection the service was providing care and support to 73 people. Visits ranged from 15 minutes up to two hours. The frequency of visits consisted of one visit per week to four visits per day, depending on people’s individual needs.

The service did not have a registered manager, but a manager was in place who was going through the registration process. 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.

An improvement was needed to ensure that people’s agreed timings were better organised. Some care rounds did not always include travelling times. This did not ensure consistency with the agreed care times.

An improvement was needed for all staff to receive formalised training in the Mental Capacity Act 2005. This would ensure that all staff were familiar with the principles of the Act and know how to apply them appropriately.

Notifications in relation to concerning information were not always submitted to the Care Quality Commission (CQC). You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.

Staff had been provided with safeguarding training to protect people from abuse and avoidable harm. There were risk management plans in place to protect and promote people’s safety. Safe recruitment practices were being followed to ensure staff were suitable to work with people.

People’s medicines were managed safely, in line with best practice guidelines; and staff had been trained in the safe handling of medicines.

Staff had been provided with induction training when joining the service, as well as regular ongoing training. This enabled them to carry out their roles and responsibilities effectively.

If needed, people were supported by staff to have a balanced diet and to access healthcare services.

People had established positive and caring relationships with staff. They were able to express their views and to be involved in making decisions about their care and support needs. Staff ensured that people’s privacy and dignity were promoted.

People’s needs were assessed prior to them being provided with care and support. Care plans were updated on a regular basis, or as and when people’s care needs changed. A copy of the service’s complaints procedure was issued to people when they started to receive care. This ensured they would be aware of how to raise a complaint if the need arose.

The culture at the service was open and inclusive. There were quality monitoring systems in place. These were used to good effect and to drive continuous improvements.

We found that people's needs had been assessed and appropriate support plans and risk assessments were in place. These were kept under review and altered as care needs changed.

Those people who required support with medication told us this was given to them correctly. One person said of the care staff, 'I am so grateful they check I have taken my medication as I don't always remember.'

We spoke with staff who told us there were sufficient staff employed and the systems in place to cover absenteeism worked well.

We found that the agency had processes in place to assess and monitor the care provided to people. This ensured people were listened to, and concerns addressed in a timely manner. They also had an effective system to manage complaints.