Background to this inspection
Updated
22 October 2021
The inspection
We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.
Inspection team
The inspection was carried out by one inspector and an Expert by Experience. An Expert by Experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.
Service and service type
This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats.
The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.
Notice of inspection
We gave the service 24 hours' notice of the inspection. This was because we needed to be sure that the provider or registered manager would be in the office to support the inspection.
What we did before the inspection
The provider had been asked to complete the required Provider Information Return. This is information providers are required to send us with key information about the service, what it does well and improvements they plan to make. The provider had not completed the PIR as the submission date had not been reached prior to the inspection. We took this into account in making our judgements in this report.
During the inspection
We spoke with two people who used the service and relatives of four people who used the service. We spoke with five members of staff, the registered manager and the nominated individual. The nominated individual is responsible for supervising the management of the service on behalf of the provider.
We reviewed a range of records. This included three people's care records and medicines records. We looked at three staff files in relation to recruitment and staff supervision. A variety of records relating to the management of the service, including policies and procedures were reviewed.
After the inspection
We continued to seek clarification from the provider to validate evidence found. We looked at training data and quality assurance records. We corresponded with two professionals who have regular contact with the service.
Updated
22 October 2021
About the service
Alina Homecare Trowbridge is a domiciliary care service, providing personal care to people living in and around Trowbridge.
Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also consider any wider social care provided. On the day of the site visit, nine people were receiving the regulated activity of personal care.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People told us they felt safe using the service. People were cared for by staff who knew how to keep them safe and protect them from avoidable harm. One person said, “I was most anxious about staying in my own home, but the carers give me the confidence to stay here knowing they will be coming in to see me and make sure I am ok. They make me feel safe knowing someone will be coming in to see me three times a day.” There were enough staff available to meet people's needs. People were supported to take their medicines safely. Incidents and accidents were reported, investigated and actions taken to prevent recurrence.
People's needs were assessed, and care plans were in place. People were cared for by staff who had been trained to carry out their roles and who were knowledgeable about the support people needed. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
People told us they were cared for by kind and compassionate staff. Staff understood the need to respect people's privacy and dignity. One person’s relative said, “All of the carers are lovely with my relative. They are all kind and patient.” Feedback received from another person’s relative was, “We would not have got through the last year if it had not been for this company. The carers were an absolute lifeline when our mental health was really suffering. We could not have had any more support than what this company gave us.”
Staff were knowledgeable about people's support needs as well as people's preferences for how they were cared for. One person’s relative said, “What sold the company to us was their time slots. They were willing to work with my relatives and us whereas another company told us what time slots they had. We needed the carers to fit around our relatives not the other way around.” People's feedback was sought. There was a complaints procedure in place and people knew how to complain if they needed to.
Systems were in place to monitor the quality of care provided and continuously improve the service. Staff spoke highly of the registered manager and said the service was a good place to work. One staff member said, “[Registered manager] is really good. Any problems, I can go to her.” Another member of staff said, “I think this is a good company to work for.”
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection
This service was registered with us on 07/10/2020 and this is the first inspection.
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.