We carried out a review of the data available to us about Reliable Personnel Limited 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 Reliable Personnel Limited, you can give feedback on this service.
Reliable Personnel Limited is a domiciliary care agency that provides personal care and support to people living in their own homes. At the time of our inspection ten people were using the service. Most people using the service were older adults. The service also provided personal care to three younger adults with a learning disability or autism.
Nine out of the ten people 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
People told us they remained happy with the home care service they received from Reliable Personnel Limited. A quote we received from a relative summed up how most people felt about this home care agency, “We get the same carers who always arrive on time and treat my [family member] with the utmost kindness and respect.”
Since our last inspection the provider had improved the way they checked the suitability and fitness of their new and existing staff team. People were supported by staff who knew how to prevent and manage risks they might face and keep them safe from avoidable harm. People received continuity of personal care and support from staff who were usually punctual for their scheduled visits and were familiar with their needs and wishes. People received they medicines as they were prescribed. The services arrangements for controlling infection remained effective.
People continued to receive personal care from staff who had completed training that was relevant to their roles and responsibilities. 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. Where staff were responsible for this, people were supported to maintain a nutritionally well-balanced diet. People continued to be supported to stay healthy and well.
Staff continued to treat people with dignity and respect. People were treated equally and had their human rights and diversity respected, including their spiritual and cultural needs and wishes. People were encouraged and supported to develop their independent living skills. Assessments of people’s support needs were carried out before they started using the service.
Care plans remained personalised, which ensured people received personal care that was tailored to meet their individual needs and wishes. People were encouraged to make decisions about the care and support they received and had their choices respected. Managers and staff understood the Accessible Information Standard and ensured people were given information in a way they could understand. People were satisfied with the way the provider dealt with their concerns and complaints. When people were nearing the end of their life, they had received compassionate and supportive care from this agency.
People spoke positively about the way the registered manager ran the service. Governance systems continued to be operated effectively. Managers recognised the importance of analysing and learning lessons when things went wrong. The provider also promoted an open and inclusive culture which sought the views of people using the service, their relatives and staff. This all helped the provider continually improve their service. The provider worked in close partnership with other health and social care professionals and agencies to plan and deliver people’s packages of care and support.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at the last inspection
The last rating for this service was Good (published 14 February 2017).
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Reliable Personnel Limited 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.
We undertook a focused follow up inspection of the service in April 2016 to check the provider had implemented their action plan and made the necessary improvements they said they would. We found the provider had made some improvements in relation to staff training and now met this outstanding breach. However, we also had to take enforcement action against the provider by issuing Warning Notices because they had repeatedly failed to operate safe staff recruitment and effective management oversight processes. As a consequence we continued to rate the service ‘Requires Improvement' overall and for the two key questions ‘is the service safe?’ and ‘well-led?’
At this comprehensive inspection we found the provider had taken the necessary steps to follow their latest action plan and make improvements to the way they checked the suitability of staff and operated their governance systems. The provider was now able to demonstrate they met the regulations.
Reliable Personnel Limited is a small domiciliary care agency that is registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to provide personal care and support to people living in their own homes. At the time of our inspection 17 older people and two younger adults who lived in the London Boroughs of Merton and Wandsworth received a home care service from this agency.
The service continued to have a registered manager in post who was also the owner. 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 saw the provider had improved their staff recruitment procedures. All new staff were appropriately checked to ensure they were suitable to work in the home care sector. This helped protect people from the risk of being supported by unsuitable staff. This included proof of these new staff’s identity, right to work in the UK, training and experience, character and previous work references and criminal records checks.
However, records showed the provider did not routinely check criminal records for existing staff, to assess their on-going suitability to work at the service. We discussed this issue with the registered manager who told us they would ensure existing staff’s criminal records would be checked at three yearly intervals from now on.
People received their medicines as prescribed. However, staff did not maintain an accurate record of medicines they prompted people to take. During our inspection the registered manager took immediate action to develop a specific form for all staff to complete on people’s daily notes that would capture the necessary information required to provide for a clear audit trail of medicines staff had supported people with.
People continued to feel safe with the staff who provided their personal care and support. There were robust procedures in place to safeguard people from harm and abuse and staff were familiar with how to recognise and report abuse. The provider assessed and managed risks to people’s safety in a way that considered their individual needs. Staff turned up on time for scheduled visits and did all the tasks they were expected to do in the allotted time. The registered manager coordinated the staff rota so people received continuity of care from the same staff who were familiar with their individual needs, routines and preferences.
Staff received appropriate training and support to ensure they had the right knowledge and skills needed to perform their roles effectively. The management team undertook unannounced spot checks to ensure staff were putting into practice what they had learnt through their training and to ensure their remained competent. The registered manager was also in regular contact with their staff team to check they were clear about their duties and responsibilities to the people they cared for.
People were supported to eat healthily, where the agency was responsible for this. Staff also took account of people’s food and drink preferences when they prepared meals. People received the support they needed to stay healthy and to access healthcare services. Staff were knowledgeable about the signs and symptoms that indicated a person’s health may be deteriorating and liaised with healthcare professionals when required.
People remained happy with the standard of care and support they received from this home care agency. People also told us staff were caring and treated them with dignity and respect. People’s privacy was maintained particularly when being supported with their personal care needs. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives. When people were nearing the end of their life, they received compassionate and supportive care.
People received personalised support that was responsive to their individual needs. People were involved in planning the care and support they received. Each person had an up to date, personalised care plan, which set out how their specific care and support needs should be met by staff. Staff regularly discussed people’s needs to identify if the level of support they required had changed, and care plans were updated accordingly.
The service had an open and transparent culture. People felt comfortable raising any issues they might have about the agency. The service had arrangements in place to deal with people’s concerns and complaints appropriately. The provider also routinely gathered feedback from people using the service, their relatives and staff. This feedback alongside the provider’s own audits and quality checks was used to continually assess, monitor and improve the quality of the service they provided.
After the comprehensive inspection the provider wrote to us to say what they would do to meet their legal requirements in relation to the three breaches of the regulations described above.
We undertook this unannounced focused inspection to check the provider had followed their action plan and to confirm that they now met legal requirements. This report only covers our findings in relation to those requirements. You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the 'all reports' link for ‘Reliable Personnel Limited’ on our website at www.cqc.org.uk’.
Reliable Personnel Limited is a domiciliary care agency that provides personal care and support to people living in their own homes. There were 20 older people receiving a service from the agency when we inspected them.
There was a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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 this focused inspection, we found the provider had taken some action to make improvements to the training and support staff received. However, we also found the provider had not taken all the steps they said they would in their action plan. Specifically, the provider had failed for the second inspection in a row to ensure all the relevant recruitment checks were carried out in respect of new staff. This repeated failure meant people had been placed at unnecessary risk of receiving inappropriate care and support from staff who might not be suitable or fit to work in the adult social care sector. We also found the provider’s governance systems used to monitor the quality of the service people received had again failed to identify that staff records did not always include two written employment and/or character references.
We have taken enforcement action against the provider and have issued a Warning Notice because of repeated breaches of the Health and Social Care (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.
This inspection took place on 4 September 2015 and was announced. We told the registered manager two days before our visit that we would be coming to ensure they would be available. The last Care Quality Commission (CQC) inspection of the service was carried out on 4 February 2014, where we found the service was meeting all the regulations we looked at.
Reliable Personnel Limited provides personal care and support to people living in their own homes. There were six people receiving domiciliary care services from this agency when we inspected. This included older people, one of whom was living with dementia, and younger adults with learning disabilities.
There was a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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.
There were risks that people’s needs may not always be met because staff were not always suitably trained or supported by the provider to carry out the roles they were employed to perform. We also found the provider’s staff recruitment procedures were not operated effectively. This was because the registered manager had not undertaken all the relevant pre-employment checks on new staff. This meant people using the service were at risk of receiving care and support from staff who might not be fit to work in this sector. Furthermore, the provider had not established good governance systems to regularly assess, monitor, and where required, improve the quality and safety of the service people received. This included having no formal processes in place to seek and act on the feedback received about the agency from people using the service, those acting on their behalf and staff. This meant the provider could not continually evaluate their service, and where required, drive improvement.
We identified three breaches of the Health and Social Care (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014 during our inspection. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.
Despite these breaches people using the service and their relatives told us they were happy with the staff who worked for the agency and the standards of the care and support they provided. They said their carer’s always turned up on time, stayed for the agreed length of time and completed all the personal care and support tasks as agreed. People also said staff were always kind and caring and never failed to respect their privacy and dignity.
People told us they felt comfortable and safe when staff from the agency visited them in their own home. The registered manager and staff knew how and when to report abuse or neglect if they suspected people were at risk. Where risks to people had been identified staff had been provided with guidance about how to manage them in order to keep people safe.
People were supported to keep healthy and well. Risks to people’s health, safety and wellbeing had been identified and steps were taken to minimise these without restricting people’s choice. Care workers were given guidance on how to minimise identified risks to people and to keep them safe from harm or injury in their own home. People were encouraged to drink and eat sufficient amounts to reduce the risks to them of malnutrition and dehydration. People received their medicines as prescribed and staff knew when to prompt people to take them.
People were involved in making decisions about their care and had care plans that focused on their needs and preferences. People had agreed to the level of support they needed and how they wished to be supported. These plans provided staff with guidance about how people’s needs and preferences should be met. When people's needs changed, the registered manager responded and reviewed the care provided.
People told us they felt comfortable raising any issues they might have about the agency with the registered manager. The service had arrangements in place to deal with people’s concerns and complaints appropriately.
Enough staff were employed by the agency to care and support the people using the service. The registered manager matched people with care workers who were able to meet their specific needs and preferences. Staff had a good understanding and awareness of people’s needs and how these should be met.
We met with the provider and a member of office staff and looked at the records kept about the service. At the last inspection we had found that care records were not always up to date and did not contain enough detailed information on how to deliver care. We found that this time the records were up to date and personalised, most contained details of people's preferences and the care to be provided.
We saw that recruitment procedures had improved and appropriate checks were carried out, both care records and those related to the running of the service were adequately maintained.
However we found that where people had more complex needs, important information was not always provided in their care plans and risk assessments.
Relatives were happy with the care provided and felt that family members were well cared for and safe. Staff we spoke with were aware of possible signs of abuse or circumstances in which to report concerns. Appropriate staff recruitment procedures were not in place. There were some systems in place to monitor the quality of the service provided but accurate records were not being maintained .
One person told us that the agency had discussed their care plan with them and said that they were kept up to date with any changes to the service. Another individual said that the agency kept in touch with them and the service was 'fine'.
A care professional commented 'what they have done for us, they have done very well'.