Network Healthcare Professionals Limited - Liverpool

Updated 8 August 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.

The inspection took place on 11 and 12 July and was announced.

The registered provider was given 48 hours’ notice prior to the inspection visit. Prior notice is provided because the location provides a community care service and we needed to be sure that staff would be available on the day.

The inspection team consisted of one adult social care inspector.

Before the inspection visit we reviewed the information we held on Network Healthcare Professionals Limited. This included notifications we had received from the registered provider such as incidents which had occurred in relation to the people who were being supported. A notification is information about important events which the service is required to send to us by law.

A Provider Information Return (PIR) was received prior to the inspection. This is the form that asks the provider to give some key information in relation to the service, what the service does well and what improvements need to be made. We also contacted commissioners and the local authority prior to the inspection. We used all this information to plan how the inspection should be conducted.

During the inspection we spoke with the registered manager, one clinical lead, three members of staff and two healthcare professionals. People who were receiving support were unable to provide any feedback to us during the inspection; three relatives agreed to be contacted over the phone so we could ask questions about the provision and quality of care provided.

We also spent time looking at specific records and documents, including five care records of people who were being supported, four staff personnel files, staff training records, medication administration records and audits, compliments and complaints, accidents and incidents, policies and procedures, safeguarding records and other documentation relating to the management of the service.

Updated 8 August 2018

Network Healthcare Professionals is a community based service. It provides care to people living in their own houses and flats in the community. It provides a service to younger and older adults who are living with complex support needs. The registered address was in Liverpool city centre. At the time of the inspection the registered provider was providing support to seven people.

Everyone being supported by Network Healthcare Professionals Limited received ‘personal care’. The Care Quality Commission (CQC) only inspects community based services where people are receiving support with ‘personal care’ such as help with tasks relating to personal hygiene and eating. We also take into account any wider social care being provided.

The inspection took place on 11 and 12 July and was announced.

At the last inspection, in November 2015 the registered provider was rated ‘Good’.

At this inspection we found the registered provider remained ‘Good’.

There was a registered manager for the service at the time of the inspection. A registered manager is 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.

All care files contained individual care plans and risk assessments which were regularly reviewed and updated in order to minimise risk. Staff were familiar with the care needs of the people they supported and were aware of the different levels of risk that needed to be robustly managed.

The appropriate risk assessments and behavioural management plans were also in place for people who presented with complex behaviours.

Staff were familiar with safeguarding and whistleblowing procedures. Staff explained how they would raise their concerns and who they would raise their concerns with. Staff had also received the necessary safeguarding training and there was relevant safeguarding and whistleblowing policies and procedures in place.

Medication was administered safely by staff who had received the appropriate training. Medication policies provided up to date and relevant guidance and staff expressed that they were suitably trained to administer medication to people who required support. PRN medication protocols ('As and when' medication) needed to be reviewed and updated. The registered manager was responsive to the feedback we provided regarding PRN protocols.

Recruitment processes were in place and the registered provider ensured that staff who were employed were suitable to work with vulnerable adults. Disclosure Barring and System (DBS) checks were conducted prior to employment commencing and also on an annual basis.

Accidents and incidents were appropriately managed by the registered provider. All necessary records were updated and the appropriate measures were put in place to mitigate risk.

The registered provider operated within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act, 2005 (MCA) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). People were involved in the day to day decisions in relation to the care and support provided.

Staff were provided with the necessary training. The relevant training enabled them to provide the care and support that was expected.

Staff explained that they received support from the registered provider on a daily basis and the registered manager operated an ‘open door’ policy.

People were effectively supported with their nutrition and hydration needs. People’s nutrition and hydration needs had been appropriately assessed and the correct measures had been implemented to safely monitor and mitigate risks which had been identified.

We received positive feedback about the quality and provision of care. Relatives told us that staff provided kind, caring and compassionate support.

Confidential and sensitive information was safely stored at the registered address and was not unnecessarily shared with others.

Care plans were person-centred and contained relevant information in relation to a person’s wishes, choice and preferences. This level of information enabled positive relationships to be developed and staff provided support that was specifically tailored to each person.

The registered provider had a complaints process in place. Complaints were responded to and managed in accordance to the policy. Relatives expressed that they would be confident complaining to the registered manager if they ever needed to.

Quality assurance systems were in place. We were provided with a variety of different audits and checks that helped to asses, monitor and identify any developments and improvements which needed to be made.

The registered provider was aware of their regulatory responsibilities and understood that CQC needed to be notified of events and incidents that occurred in accordance with the CQC’s statutory notifications procedures.