Archived: Aylsham Homecare

Updated 10 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.

The inspection took place on 4 August 2016 and was announced. The provider was given 48 hours’ notice because the location provides a domiciliary care service. The management team sometimes spends time away from the office supporting staff and the people who use the service. Notice was given to ensure the management team was available to assist our inspection. The inspection was carried out by one inspector.

Before we carried out the inspection we reviewed the information we held about the service. This included statutory notifications that the provider had sent us in the last year. A statutory notification contains information about significant events that affect people’s safety, which the provider is required to send to us by law. 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 contacted the local authority safeguarding team and the local authority quality assurance team for their views on the service.

During the inspection we visited the service’s office, spoke with eight people who used the service and seven relatives. We also spoke with the registered manager, the assistant manager and three care staff.

We looked at the care records for four people who used the service. We also viewed records relating to the management of the service. These included risk assessments, two staff recruitment files, training records, accidents and incidents and quality monitoring questionnaires.

Updated 10 September 2016

The inspection took place on 4 August 2016 and we contacted the service before we visited to announce the inspection so we could ensure that the manager would be available.

Aylsham Homecare provides a domiciliary care service to a total of fifteen older people, some of whom may be living with dementia. The service delivers care and support to people in their own homes in Aylsham and the surrounding area.

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. The registered manager was also the registered provider of the service.

People and their relatives told us that they would recommend the service. They spoke of a caring service that they could rely upon. People told us that the staff were capable in their roles and went beyond people’s expectations to deliver a service; that they went ‘the extra mile’. People spoke highly of the management team and described them as professional, meticulous and efficient.

Checks were completed on potential employees to ensure they were suitable to work in health and social care and that they had the skills and knowledge to deliver the service. There were enough staff to meet people’s individual needs in a person-centred manner and at a time of their choosing.

People benefited from receiving care and support from staff that had been effectively trained and introduced to the role. Staff received a flexible induction and this was carried out by the management team to ensure competency in the role. Staff told us that they felt supported, received regular supervisions and had their competency for the role regularly assessed.

Staff had built trusting relationships with each other, the management team and the people who used the service. They worked well as a team and their flexible approach ensured the service was reliable. Staff understood the positive impact achieved by maintaining a person’s dignity and independence. People told us they felt respected, listened to and treated as an equal.

Processes were in place to help protect people from the risk of abuse. Staff had received training in this and demonstrated that they understood how to protect, prevent, identify and report potential abuse. They were aware of the different types of abuse and the associated symptoms that may indicate a person was being abused. The registered manager had reported concerns in the past as required.

The individual risks associated with the people who used the service, and the staff, had been identified, assessed and appropriately managed. These had been regularly reviewed. Accidents and incidents had been recorded and the management team had taken the appropriate action.

The CQC is required to monitor the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and report on what we find. The service adhered to the five principles of the MCA and the management team had a good understanding of this. Staff had received training in MCA but their knowledge was variable.

A person-centred service was being delivered and people spoke of a service that met their needs, was flexible and delivered a high quality, personal service. Care and support plans had been developed with the person and the management team had spent time building relationships in order to further enhance the service being delivered. People’s care and support plans gave staff enough information to perform their role. The staff and management team knew the people who used the service well.

Staff assisted people to maintain relationships, hobbies and interests where required. The service was flexible which allowed people to follow their interests and access the community. Where needed, staff assisted people on activities outside of their home. If people required assistance to prepare meals or meet their nutritional needs, this was received.

People benefited from receiving care and support from staff who knew them and their health needs well. Staff had the knowledge to prevent and identify health deterioration. Where and when needed, staff assisted people to access healthcare services and made appointments for them as required. People and their relatives spoke of a proactive service that was attentive to people’s needs.

The staff and management team were enthusiastic about the service they delivered and demonstrated that they strove to improve. Feedback from people was encouraged and via a route that was preferable to each individual. The management team had a good overview of the service being delivered and regularly visited the people who used the service to gain their feedback and make themselves available. Staff meetings were held regularly.