Archived: Pulse - Leeds

Updated 7 September 2016

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.

Our inspection took place on 10 and 11 August 2016 and was announced. We gave the provider 48 hours’ notice as they provide services to people in their own homes and we needed to be sure someone would be in the office to speak with us.

The inspection team consisted of one adult social care inspector. Before the inspection we reviewed the information we held about the service including previous inspection reports and notifications sent to the CQC by and about the service. In addition we contacted Healthwatch and local authorities who commission services from the provider to ask whether they had any feedback to share with us. Healthwatch is an independent consumer champion that gathers and represents the views of the public about health and social care services in England. They did not provide any information of concern.

We sent a provider information request (PIR) before this inspection. 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 reviewed what the provider had told us before the inspection.

During the inspection we looked at records relating to the running of the service and provision of care. We looked in detail at two people’s care plans and records relating to their medicines. We also spoke with the registered manager, the provider’s quality assurance manager, two nurses, two case managers, two members of care staff, one person who used the service and one person’s relative.

Updated 7 September 2016

Our inspection took place on 10 and 11 August 2016 and was announced. At our last inspection in January 2014 we found the provider was meeting all the standards we looked at.

Pulse Community Healthcare Associate provides social care and health support services to people in their own homes. Pulse Leeds works with a variety of organisations to provide bespoke 'care packages'. The agency provides care and support to a wide range of people including people who are elderly, people diagnosed with dementia and people with learning or physical disabilities. At the time of our inspection there were 17 people using the service.

There was a registered manager in post 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.

Risks associated with people’s care and support were well assessed, and documented in detail to ensure staff worked with people in ways which minimised those risks. The provider ensured staff were knowledgeable about the risks of abuse and had policies, practices and training in place to ensure staff understood their responsibilities under safeguarding.

We saw accidents and incidents were reported to the office and logged on an electronic system. We were able to see what actions had been taken in response to these reports.

Recruitment of staff was safe. The provider undertook thorough background checks of applicants and kept records of applications and interviews used to assess their suitability for the role.

Medicines were well managed, and where errors in recording had occurred we were able to see documents which showed the registered manager had taken action to prevent the error re- occurring.

Staff received a thorough induction which included checks on their competencies with a variety of procedures before they began providing care and support unsupervised. We saw there was a programme of training in place which included mandatory training which was regularly refreshed. Staff also received training specific to the needs of people they supported. A programme of regular supervision meetings and annual appraisals was in place.

People gave consent for their care and treatment, and there were appropriate systems in place to ensure that people who lacked capacity to make decisions were appropriately supported with best interests’ decisions and reference to the Court of Protection.

The provider asked at interview about potential staff member’s approach to maintaining people’s privacy and dignity, and we received feedback from people to confirm staff worked in ways which ensured peoples’ dignity and independence were respected.

People were involved in writing their care plans, which were written in a person-centred way and contained guidance for staff to enable them to deliver care and support in the ways the person preferred. Care plans were reviewed regularly with people to ensure they always represented up to date care and support needs.

We saw the provider had robust systems in place to ensure any complaints or concerns were recorded and investigated.

Feedback about leadership in the service was positive, and we saw there was a high level of provider support for the registered manager. Quality in the service was measured at provider level, with the registered manager receiving reports and action plans as required.