We carried out a review of the data available to us about The AICS Group on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about The AICS Group, you can give feedback on this service.
The AICS Group provides care at home to people. They provide the regulated service of personal care to children and adults living with acquired brain injuries.
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. At the time of our inspection whilst 51 people were receiving a service from the agency, only 14 people received the regulated activity of personal care.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
All people and relatives described staff as caring and kind. Most relatives had a consistent care worker team who were experienced and reliable. However, one relative whilst they had reliable permanent staff member had experienced cover staff who did not attend as arranged. They had asked the provider to address this.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice
People had detailed person-centred care plans and risk assessments that outlined how they wanted their care to be provided. Information in the plans gave good guidance for staff to mitigate the risk of harm.
Care workers worked in partnership with a multi-disciplinary health team which was co-ordinated by a case manager for the benefit of people using the service. Regular training was provided for staff to help ensure they had the necessary skills to work with everyone.
The management team undertook spot checks to help ensure staff maintained good practice and spoke with case managers, people and relatives to get their feedback. People, relatives and staff found the registered manager approachable and responsive when they raised concerns.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection
The last rating for this service on 27 April 2017 was good (published on 22 June 2017).
At this inspection. We rated the service good in safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led. Therefore, we found the service good overall.
There was a failure to display the current CQC ratings on their website. This is a legal requirement. They had instead a previous report displayed from an inspection in 2015. We will follow this up with the provider.
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating
Please see the sections of this full report.
Follow up
We will request an action plan for the provider to understand what they will do to ensure their current report is published on their website.
The AICS Group is an agency providing personal care and support to people who have an acquired brain injury. The current agency’s location was registered with the CQC on 10 November 2014. At the time of our inspection the agency provided personal care to 13 people in different parts of the country. The agency had employed up to 60 staff members out of which 33 delivered a regulated activity.
The agency was run by two directors; both managed the service and one was also the registered manager with CQC. 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
The management team carried out investigations into all safeguarding concerns, accidents, incidents and complaints raised by the people using the service and their relatives.
The agency had assessed risk to the health and wellbeing of people who used the service and staff had clear guidelines on how to support people safely.
The agency had been recruiting staff to meet the specific needs of people who used the service. The agency had robust recruitment procedures in place to ensure only suitable staff were appointed to work with people who used the service.
Family members stated there were enough staff deployed to meet their relatives’ needs and people were supported by staff they knew and were familiar with.
People received their medicines as prescribed and staff were sufficiently trained to administer medicines safely.
Staff had the knowledge and skills they needed to carry out their roles and responsibilities. They received regular training and support to help them carry out their roles effectively.
The agency was working within the principles of the MCA and care had been planned in the best interest of people who used the service.
The agency worked closely with other healthcare professionals to ensure people’s needs had been met.
The agency had promoted people’s independence and staff encouraged people to set short and long-term goals for their progress and development.
Family members told us staff treated their relatives with dignity and respect when providing personal care. People were able to choose female or male staff to support them.
People’s care was planned in a person centred way and reflected people’s care needs and individual preferences. People and their families had been involved in forming of people’s individual care packages.
The agency had a complaints procedure in place and people and their relatives were aware of it.
People and their family members were encouraged to share their experience of the care provided by the agency.
People and family members knew the management team and could contact them with any queries.
Staff felt the agency was well-led and they were happy to work there. They felt supported and valued by the management team.
The agency had a variety of systems in place to ensure continues high quality of the service delivery.
The agency had worked in close partnership with external professionals who gave positive feedback about their partnership work with the agency.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.
The inspection took place on 25 February 2015 and was announced. The provider was given 48 hours’ notice because the location provides a domiciliary care service; we needed to be sure that someone would be in. This was the first inspection of the service which was registered on 10 November 2014.
The AICS Group is a location providing personal care and support to people living in their own homes who have an acquired brain injury. The provider was formally known as Third Door Care Limited but was in the process of changing their name to The AICS Group at the time of our inspection. The organisation was registered in 2012 and this location was registered in 2014 when the provider moved premises. At the time of our inspection they provided personal care to nine people. The agency provided support to people in different parts of the country. The organisation was run by two directors, both managed the service and one was also the registered manager with CQC. 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
There were procedures regarding safeguarding vulnerable adults and children and the staff were aware of these. Risks to people’s wellbeing had been assessed and there were plans to reduce these risks. People received their medicines in a safe and appropriate way.
People were supported by staff who had the skills and training they needed. The staff worked remotely and often in a different area of the country to the agency’s office. However, they felt supported and told us managers were always available when they needed them.
People’s capacity to consent had been assessed and recorded. They told us they had consented to the care and treatment they received.
People were given support to meet their health care and nutritional needs.
People had positive relationships with the staff who were supporting them. They felt their privacy and dignity were respected and they were able to make decisions about their own care and treatment.
People’s needs had been assessed and they had been involved in creating their own support plan. They told us they were happy that staff followed this and met their needs.
People knew how to make a complaint and were satisfied that the agency had responded appropriately to complaints they had made.
The agency was a small provider offering a bespoke service to privately funded people. People were involved in planning and improving their own care package.
The agency had plans for development and had recruited more staff to meet the needs of the service as it changed.