The inspection took place on the 7 June 2016 and was announced. The provider was given 48 hour’s notice because the location provides a domiciliary care service. We wanted to be sure that someone would be in to speak with us.Home Instead Senior Care Crawley is a domiciliary care service which provides personal care and support services for a range of people living in their own homes. These included older people and people living with dementia. At the time of our inspection 28 people were receiving a service, of which eight were receiving the regulated activity of personal care.
The service did not have a registered manager. 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 previous registered manager had recently left the service. The provider had recruited a new manager who was due to start within a week of the inspection.
The experiences of people were positive. People told us they felt safe, that staff were kind and the care they received was good. One person told us “I feel safe with everyone that comes to visit”. A relative told us “It feels so safe leaving the staff with my relative”.
People told us that staff were kind and caring. One person told us “All the carers are lovely, just wonderful”. Another person said “They are caring, considerate and respect me”.
The provider had arrangements in place for the safe administration of medicines. People were supported to receive their medicine when they needed it. People were supported to maintain good health and had assistance to access to health care services when needed.
People told us they received their care calls consistently and always received the care they required. Risks to people were assessed and monitored to ensure action was taken to avoid accidents and the deterioration of people’s health. The service had recruited a sufficient number of suitably qualified staff to meet people’s needs. Recruitment practice was robust and protected people from the risk of receiving support from staff who were unsuitable.
The service considered peoples capacity using the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) as guidance. People’s capacity to make decisions had been assessed. Staff observed the key principles in their day to day work checking with people that they were happy for them to undertake care tasks before they proceeded.
Staff were skilled and felt fully supported by the provider to undertake their roles. They were given training updates, supervision and development opportunities. One member of staff told us “The training on induction was detailed and good. We learnt a lot and then when I started [the providers name] took me out to visit a person and go through their care needs and introduce me to them, all very good”.
People were happy with the care they received, and said they saw regular consistent staff that knew them well and treated them with kindness. One person told us “Consistent staff who are always on time for the calls”.
People and their relatives were given information on how to make a complaint. Feedback from people was asked for and responded to. One person told us “I have no issues, any concerns they would deal with straight away no problem”.
The service was well led and had good leadership and direction from the provider. People, relatives and health professionals were complimentary of the management of the service. One relative told us “Could not praise the management more. Consistently supportive with everything, totally professional over and above” Staff felt fully supported by the provider to undertake their roles. There were quality assurance systems in place to ensure a high quality of care and support was provided.