Anamar-Care Ltd

Updated 4 January 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 checked 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.

This inspection took place on 8 and 17 November 2017 and was announced. We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection visit because it is small and the manager is often out of the office supporting staff or providing care. We needed to be sure that they would be available to speak with us.

Inspection site visit activity started on 8 November and ended on 17 November 2017. It included phone calls to people using the service, and visits to people in their own home accompanied by the registered manager. We visited the office location on 8 November 2017 to see the manager and to review care records and policies and procedures.

The inspection was carried out by one inspector.

Before the inspection, the provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We also reviewed the information we held about the service. This included correspondence we had received and notifications submitted by the service. A notification must be sent to the Care Quality Commission every time a significant incident has taken place, for example where a person who uses the service experiences a serious injury.

During the inspection we spoke on the telephone with one person being supported by the service and visited two people in their own home. During the home visits we also spoke with two relatives. We looked at records in relation to four people's care. We spoke with three members of care staff and the registered manager who is also director of the provider company. We looked at records relating to the management of the service and systems for monitoring the quality of the service.

Updated 4 January 2018

This announced inspection took place on 8 and 17 November 2017. This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides support with personal care to people living in their own houses and flats in the community. It provides a service to older adults. At the time of our inspection the service was providing support to five people.

The service had 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.

Staff were aware of their responsibilities to raise any concerns either within the service or to external bodies if appropriate. The service had policies and procedures in place to deal with safeguarding concerns.

The service had worked to minimise risks to people receiving care and support. Care plans provided guidance for staff on the care and support to be provided and how identified risks were addressed. Risk assessments were regularly reviewed and updated to ensure they remained up to date with people’s changing needs.

Before employing staff the service carried out appropriate checks to ensure that new staff were suitable to work in the care industry. Staff received the appropriate training to ensure they provided safe and effective care and support. The service ensured that this training was regularly updated. Staff received regular monitoring and support from the service to ensure they provided a good quality of care. There were sufficient staff to provide the care and support people required.

Where the service supported people with their medicines this was carried out safely. Staff were trained in the administration of medicines and the service had an appropriate policy in place.

Care plans were regularly reviewed with the full involvement of people and their relatives to ensure they remained current and that the service was meeting their changing needs. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People received support from a regular team of care staff who they had developed good relationships with. People told us that staff treated them with respect supporting their dignity and independence. Care staff supported people to be as independent as they were able.

The service encouraged people to provide feedback about the quality of the service they received. The registered manager knew all of the people the service supported. People told us that they would have no hesitation in contacting the service if they had any concerns. There was a formal complaints procedure which people were aware of.

There were quality assurance processes in place including audits and satisfaction surveys. The registered manager responded promptly to any concerns. Staff were involved in the development and direction of the service.