We carried out a review of the data available to us about Home Instead Senior Care Basingstoke 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 Home Instead Senior Care Basingstoke, you can give feedback on this service.
This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats in the community. It provides a service to older adults, younger adults, people living with dementia, learning disabilities, mental health, physical disabilities and sensory impairments.
Not everyone using Home Instead Senior Care Basingstoke received regulated activity; CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also take into account any wider social care provided.
There was a registered manager in post. 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 recruited safely as the provider obtained the necessary pre-employment checks. Once employed, staff were trained and supported with team meetings and supervisions. Staff told us they felt supported by the service.
People were treated with kindness and respect. They were matched to a member of staff and supported by a core group of workers. This gave people continuity of care which they appreciated. The service employed sufficient staff to cover the care packages agreed.
Staff were aware of the different types of abuse and how to report any concerns. They were confident that the appropriate action would be taken by management at the service.
Risks were identified and managed effectively to protect people from avoidable harm. Accidents and incidents were recorded and reported appropriately. The service took appropriate action in response to incidents. There was not a formal system in place to monitor accidents and incidents.
We have made a recommendation about the monitoring of accidents and incidents.
People received care and support following an assessment of their needs. The service put personalised care plans in place and reviewed people’s needs regularly.
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. Staff sought consent to care and treatment.
People’s right to confidentiality was protected and records were kept securely. Staff kept daily records which were audited regularly. There were systems in place to monitor the quality and safety of the service. People’s feedback was sought and acted on where appropriate.
Complaints were managed and records kept to demonstrate action taken. The service had received many compliments about the care and support provided.
Medicines were managed safely, care plans recorded the level of support people required with their medicines. Staff were assessed for their competence to administer medicines.
There was an open and positive culture at the service which people and staff appreciated. The management was visible and approachable. The service encouraged their staff to visit the office at least weekly or at any time they required help and support.