Abbey Care Direct Limited

Updated 11 June 2019

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:

One Inspector and one Expert by Experience carried out the inspection. An Expert by Experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service. The Expert by Experience had experience of supporting older adults.

Service and service type: This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats. It provides a service to older adults.

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 4 days’ notice of the inspection site visit because it is small, and we needed to be sure that they would be in. Inspection site visit activity started on 13 May 2019 and ended on 15 May 2019. We visited the office location on 13 May 2019 to see the manager and office staff; and to review care records and policies and procedures.

What we did:

Before our inspection, we checked the information we held about Abbey Care Direct Limited. This included notifications the registered provider sent us about incidents that affect the health, safety and welfare of people who received support.

We also contacted the commissioning and contracts departments at Shropshire County Council and Healthwatch. Healthwatch is the local consumer champion for health and social care services. They give consumers a voice by collecting their views, concerns and compliments through their engagement work. This helped us to gain a balanced overview of what people experienced when they received support at Abbey Care Direct Limited.

We looked at information the provider sent us in the Provider Information Return. This is information we require providers to send us at least once annually to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. All the information gathered before our inspection went into completing our planning document that guides the inspection. The planning document allows key lines of enquiry to be investigated focusing on any current concerns, areas of risk and good or outstanding practice.

During this inspection, we visited four people in their own homes. We spoke with five people and three relatives on the telephone. We spoke with the registered manager, deputy manager and three carers. After the inspection site visit we received feedback from two health care professionals about the service provided. We looked at the care records of five people, recruitment of two staff members, service training records, and records relating to the administration of medicines and the management of the service. We looked at what quality audit tools and data management systems the registered manager had.

We used all the information gathered to inform our judgements about the fundamental standards of quality and safety of the service delivered by Abbey Care Direct Limited.

Updated 11 June 2019

About the service: Abbey Care Direct Limited is a domiciliary care agency. They provide support to people within their own homes, so they can live as independently as possible. At the time of the inspection the service was providing personal care to 33 people who were living in their own homes.

People’s experience of using this service:

Staff told us they had appropriate training, knowledge and support to keep people safe. Staff could tell us how they managed risk while respecting the person and supporting their dignity.

People and relatives felt confident in staff, they told us there was a caring culture within the service and staffing levels were appropriate.

We looked at how the management team planned their rotas. Staff were given travelling time between visits to ensure people received their allocated and appropriate support.

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.

Care plans had been developed with people and their relatives being involved throughout the process. These were reviewed to reflect people’s current needs. The management of risk was included within the care plan to minimise the likelihood of preventable harm occurring.

Staff files we looked at showed the registered manager used the same safe recruitment procedures we found at our last inspection. Staff told us training was ongoing and they received refresher training to update their knowledge.

There was a complaints procedure which was made available to people and their families. People we spoke with told us they had not made a formal complaint. The service continued to have good oversight of relevant procedures through monitoring and auditing to ensure people received effective support and the service was well led.

The management team used a variety of methods to assess and monitor the quality of the service. These included questionnaires to seek their views about the service provided.

The service worked in partnership with outside agencies, health and social care professionals to ensure people received timely healthcare support.

Rating at last inspection: At the last inspection the service was rated good (published 31 August 2016).

Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the rating at the last 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 any issues or concerns are identified, we may inspect sooner.

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