Archived: MiHomecare - Reading

At the time of the inspection 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.

People felt safe using the service. They were protected from possible abuse by staff who were trained in and understood their responsibilities to safeguard people. Recruitment processes were robust and helped to ensure people were supported by suitable staff. Risks to people’s well-being were assessed and management plans were in place to reduce identified risks. Sufficient numbers of staff were deployed. However, this necessitated the use of agency staff at times which people did not always like. People received their medicines safely and staff were familiar with the actions they should take in an emergency.

People received effective care from a staff team who were well trained and felt supported by the registered manager and office staff. Staff support included one to one supervision meetings and informal support and advice being available at any time they required it. Staff understood their responsibilities in protecting people’s rights to make decisions for themselves. They offered people choice and sought people’s consent before providing support. Advice from health and social care professionals was sought and acted on appropriately. When it was part of their care, people were supported to have enough to eat and drink.

People were treated with kindness and compassion. Staff protected people’s privacy and dignity when supporting them with personal care. People were helped to maintain independence as much as possible. Confidentiality was respected and people’s personal information was kept securely.

The service was responsive to people’s needs which were assessed and reviewed. Care plans were developed and reflected people’s personal preferences and routines. The service used feedback from people using the service and other stakeholders to improve the service. Complaints were taken seriously and responded to in line with the provider’s policy.

There was an open, friendly and positive culture in the service. Staff felt supported by the registered manager and were confident to raise concerns and issues. People received care and support from a staff team that worked well together and upheld the values set by the provider. The quality of the service was monitored, short comings identified and action was taken to make improvements.

At the last inspection on 26 February and 4 March 2015 we asked the provider to take action to make improvements in meeting people's individual needs safely, managing medicines, responding to complaints, deployment of staff and monitoring the quality of the service. The provider sent us an action plan and told us they would meet the relevant requirements by 30 October 2015 and these actions have been completed.

At the time of the inspection there was no 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 provider had appointed a branch manager in December 2015 who was waiting for a Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) check in order to be able to register with CQC.

There were sufficient numbers of staff deployed by the service. A targeted recruitment drive had enabled the service to stop using agency staff. People mostly received their care from a consistent team of care staff. Recruitment processes were robust and helped to ensure suitable staff were employed.

Work had been undertaken to improve the scheduling of visits. Time was allocated to care workers to travel between visits helping to ensure people received more timely visits. However people and professionals told us timeliness of visits could be an issue with some visits being made late. Further work to train the care co-ordinators in the efficient use of the computerised scheduling system was taking place in order to overcome these issues.

The provider had reviewed their medicines policy which was robust and gave staff clear guidance to follow in order to support people with their medicines safely. People told us they received their medicines when they needed them. Audits of medicine administration records were conducted frequently. Issues or errors were noted, addressed with staff and action taken.

People told us they felt safe using the service. Risk assessments had been completed to identify risks to individual people and to staff. Guidance was available for staff to use in order to minimise those risks.

Following a period of feeling unsupported staff had begun to feel they could go to the new manager and they would be listened to. They benefited from regular meetings with their line manager and had an opportunity to discuss their work and future development at an annual appraisal.

People felt staff were knowledgeable. Staff were inducted into the service using the care certificate standards and then received regular refresher training. Their practical skills were assessed at unannounced spot checks carried out by senior staff.

Staff understood their responsibilities in relation to gaining consent before providing support and care. People’s right to make decisions was protected. Staff sought advice from health and social care professionals when appropriate in order to maintain people’s well-being.

People told us they were treated with kindness and their privacy and dignity was respected by the staff who visited them. They told us they mostly received their care from a consistent team of care staff but on occasion were visited by care staff unfamiliar to them.

Staff knew people well and described how they cared for them. People told us they were supported to be as independent as they wished to be. They told us they had been involved in the planning and review of their care.

People’s personal and confidential information was protected by staff who were knowledgeable about what information could be shared and with whom. People knew how to make a complaint and who they could speak to about any concerns they had. Complaints made to the service had been recorded, investigated and responded to in a timely manner. Appropriate actions had been taken in response to complaints made.

Staff responded to people’s changing needs and communicated information promptly to the wider care team. Where it was part of the agreed care plan people were supported to take part in activities in the community.

Quality assurance audits were conducted and had identified areas for improvement. Action had been taken to improve and develop the service using this information. Staff felt the culture of the service had improved recently and described it as “open and informative.” They described the new manager as “approachable.” Due to the diverse locations staff worked in they did not always feel they were part of a wider team. The new manager was addressing this and had organised staff meetings to bring the team together.