Classic Home Care Services Limited

Updated 16 February 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. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider was meeting the legal

requirements and regulations associated with the Act, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team:

Two inspectors carried out the inspection and an expert by experience assisted with phone calls to relatives and people. 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:

Classic Home Care Services Limited is registered as a domiciliary care agency. However, they also provide live in carers to people who use the service and live in their own homes

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 a short notice period of the inspection. This was because it is a small service and we needed to be sure that the provider or registered manager would be in the office to support the inspection. We also needed to ensure the correct checks were in place during this COVID-19 pandemic prior to our visit.

What we did before the inspection:

We reviewed information we had received about the service since it was last inspected by us on 10 May 2019. This included any notifications of significant events, such as serious injuries or safeguarding referrals. Notifications are information about important events which the provider is required to send us by law.

The provider was not asked to complete a provider information return prior to this inspection. This is information we require providers to send us to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We took this into account when we inspected the service

During the inspection:

We spoke to one person who used the service and seven relatives of people who use the service. We spoke with the registered manager on the day of inspection. We checked care records for six people, including their assessments, care plans and risk assessments. We looked at three staff files and records of team meetings. We also looked at medicines’ management, accident and incident records, quality monitoring checks and audits.

After the inspection:

The registered manager sent us further information which we had requested whilst on site. This included some further detailed risk assessments. We spoke to a further five people who use the service by telephone, and we spoke with four care workers.

Updated 16 February 2021

About the service:

Classic Home Care Service Limited provides a domiciliary care service to people living in Epsom and the surrounding area. Care and support is provided to people living in their own homes and flats. Support is provided to people living with dementia, learning disabilities, younger adults and people living with mental health needs. At the time of our inspection the service was providing support to 57 people receiving the regulated activity.

Not everyone using a domiciliary care agency receives 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, such as supporting people to access the community.

People's experience of using this service:

People told us they felt safe and well supported in their own homes. People and relatives told us they thought the staff supporting them were well trained and knew all about their needs.

The provider had made improvements following the last inspection with regards to how individual risk was identified and assessed for people. Potential risks to people had been assessed and measures put in place to mitigate these. The registered manager sent us additional examples of how they are continuing to identify risk for people and continuing to think of new ways to adapt risk assessments. If accidents or incidents occurred, staff acted to reduce the risk of similar incidents happening again.

The provider had improved the management and oversight of people’s medication. The provider had introduced a new electronic system for people’s medicines which had allowed improvements to be made from the previous inspection and the registered manager told us this had really supported and driven change within the service to safely manage people’s medicines.

People and relatives told us staff maintained appropriate standards of hygiene and infection control and supported them appropriately through the COVID-19 pandemic. Staff supported people to maintain good health and worked effectively with any professionals involved in their care.

The provider took great care when recruiting new staff to ensure they met the values of the service. Staff understood and practised their responsibilities to keep people safe from harm.

The provider had made improvements to the way the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) were adhered to. Where relatives had signed on behalf of the person to consent to care the provider had in place the correct legal authority documents. 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 were supported by staff who promoted their independence as much as possible. People and relatives told us carers were motivated to make a difference and that they made them feel happy, safe and gave them confidence.

People and relatives reported that they were very satisfied with the quality of care and support they experienced, and they had been able to give feedback to the provider.

People and relatives told us they felt the service was well run and that they could contact the registered manager or office team whenever they needed. People and relatives said they felt listened to and able to offer their opinions on the care and support in place.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection and update.

At our last inspection, the service was rated "Requires Improvement". Our last report was published on 04 June 2019.

The provider completed an action plan after the last inspection to show what they would do and by when to improve. At this inspection we found improvements had been made and the provider was no longer in breach of regulations.

Why we Inspected:

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection of this service on 10 May 2019. A breach of legal requirements was found. The provider completed an action plan after the last inspection to show what they would do and by when to improve Need for Consent.

We undertook this focused inspection to check they had followed their action plan and to confirm they now met legal requirements. This report only covers our findings in relation to the Key Questions Safe, Effective and Well-led which contain those requirements.

The ratings from the previous comprehensive inspection for those key questions not looked at on this occasion were used in calculating the overall rating at this inspection. The overall rating for the service has changed from Requires Improvement to Good. This is based on the findings at this inspection

Follow up:

We will continue to monitor intelligence 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.