Archived: Housing & Care 21 - Rotherham

Housing and Care 21 Rotherham is a domiciliary care agency. The service is registered to provide personal care to people in their own homes. At the time of our inspection the service was predominantly supporting older people and people living with dementia. Care and support was co-ordinated from the office, which was based in Dinnington near Rotherham.

There was not a registered manager at the time of our inspection. 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. The registered manager had left in 2014. A new manager had been appointed to manage two locations they commenced in post on 4 July 2016. The manager had commenced the registration process to register with CQC.

We found that people’s needs had been assessed before their care package commenced. Most people who used the service and their relatives that we spoke with told us they had been involved in creating and updating their care plans. The information included in the care records we saw identified people’s individual needs and preferences, as well as any risks associated with their care and the environment they lived in.

We saw evidence that staff had been trained to administer medication; however staff did not always follow the procedures, which put people at risk of not receiving medication as prescribed. The provider had identified this and was taking action at the time of our inspection.

People who used the service who we spoke with told us the care staff were very good, staff were kind caring and always stayed the required time ensuring care needs were met.

We found that staff we spoke with had an understanding of the legal requirements as required under the Mental Capacity Act (2005) Code of Practice. The Mental Capacity Act 2005 sets out how to act to support people who do not have the capacity to make some or all decisions about their care.

There were robust recruitment procedures in place. The provider was recruiting staff at the time of our inspection to ensure adequate staff were employed to meet people’s needs.

Staff had received supervision, although this had not always been as frequent as the provider’s policies required. This was had been due to staff shortages which were being rectified at the time of our inspection. However, staff we spoke with told us they felt supported. Annual appraisals were carried out, these ensured development and training to support staff to fulfil their roles and responsibilities was identified.

People who used the service told us they were aware of the complaints procedure and said they would contact the office if they had any problems. People said, the office staff are always available and deal with any issues immediately. However people told us if they wanted to contact the office out of hours this always proved difficult and on occasions could not get hold of anyone.

People who used the service had opportunity to give feedback by completing questionnaires which were sent twice yearly. The provider also asked people’s relatives and other professionals what they thought of the service and used people’s feedback to improve the service.

The provider had a system to monitor the quality of the service provided. However, at the time of our inspection the provider had identified these were not effective, therefore new audits and systems for monitoring the quality of the service provided were being introduced. These needed to be completed and embedded into practice.