Background to this inspection
Updated
25 February 2023
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 Health and Social Care Act 2008.
Inspection team
This inspection was carried out by one inspector.
Service and service type
This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses or flats.
This service is required to have a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. 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.
At the time of our inspection there was not a registered manager in post, although a person had been appointed to this position and had commenced their application to register with CQC.
Notice of inspection
This inspection was announced. We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection. This was because it is a small service and we needed to be sure that the provider would be in the office to support the inspection.
Inspection activity started on 9 January 2023 and 30 January 2023. We visited the location’s office on 16 January 2023.
What we did before the inspection
We used the information the provider sent us in the provider information return (PIR). This is information providers are required to send us annually with key information about their service, what they do well, and improvements they plan to make. We reviewed other information we had received about the service since it was registered with the CQC. We took this into account when we inspected the service and made the judgements in this report. We used all this information to plan our inspection.
During the inspection
We spoke with the Director of the company who is also the nominated individual. This person had legal responsibility for supervising the management of the service. We also spoke with the manager who was in the process of completing their application to register with CQC.
We looked at three people’s care planning and one person’s medicines records as well as recruitment, supervision and training information for 5 care staff.
We received feedback from 1 person using the service and 3 relatives about how safe they, or their relatives, felt and how the service supported them in the care they needed. We also received feedback from 1 member of the care staff team about what it was like to work for the service and how well they thought the service trained and supported them.
Updated
25 February 2023
About the service
Radfield Homecare (Camden, Islington and Haringey) is a small sized domiciliary care service, currently providing support to four people.
Not everyone that used the service received personal care. The Care Quality Commission (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.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
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 and the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
People’s safety was promoted because the service assessed, monitored and managed their safety well. Potential risks that people may face had been identified, assessed and were regularly reviewed. The assessments provided information about steps that care staff could take to support people to ensure that any potential risks were minimised.
The service had enough staff to cater for the needs of the people currently using the service. Pre-employment checks had been carried out for care staff. These checks helped to safeguard people using the service by ensuring that only suitable applicants were offered work with the service.
People received their medicines safely. People did not usually require care staff to assist them with taking their medicines, but staff did do so on occasions when a person’s family were not available to help them. The type of medicines support required was recorded on medicines administration records [MAR] to show medicine had been taken.
People were protected from the risks associated with poor infection control because the service used effective infection, prevention and control measures. Personal protective equipment, for example face masks, gloves and hand sanitiser, was provided in suitable quantities to staff. Guidance for staff and training was provided and staff were assessed to ensure these measures were maintained.
The service completed an assessment of each person’s needs and personal wishes about how they were cared for and care plans included guidance about meeting these needs.
There was a process in place to report, monitor and learn from accidents and incidents. Significant events had not taken place although the provider and manager told us if any events did occur these would be documented and reviewed in line with the service’s policy and guidance.
There was an effective training system in place. People were supported by staff who had received relevant induction training in evidence-based practice.
People’s nutritional needs were met. Care staff did support some people to prepare light meals although no-one currently required help to eat or drink. The service had taken steps to make sure people’s nutrition and hydration needs were assessed and met.
People’s health needs were met. Care staff were able to assist people to attend healthcare appointments if requested. Usually either people themselves, with the assistance of a family member, managed these appointments independently.
Staff respected people’s choices, including those relevant to protected characteristics, for example, due to disability, cultural or religious preferences.
Governance processes were effective and helped to assess, monitor and check the quality of the service provided to people.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection
This is the first inspection of the service. This service was registered with us on 24/11/2021.
Why we inspected
This inspection was prompted by a review of the information we held about this service.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.