Archived: Temp Exchange Limited

Updated 22 October 2016

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

The inspection to the service’s office took place on 8 August 2016. Telephone calls were made to people using the service and staff on 26 August 2016. The inspection was announced. The provider was given 72 hours’ notice because the location provides a domiciliary care service and we needed to be sure that someone would be in.

The inspection team consisted of two inspectors.

We reviewed the information we held about the service including safeguarding alerts and other notifications. This refers specifically to incidents, events and changes the provider and registered manager are required to notify us about by law.

We spoke with three people who used the service, three members of staff, the provider, the manager and the office manager.

We reviewed three people’s support plans and support records. We looked at the service’s staff support records for four members of staff. We also looked at the service’s arrangements for the management of complaints, compliments, safeguarding information and the provider’s quality monitoring and audit information. 2015

Updated 22 October 2016

Temp Exchange Limited provides personal care and support to people in their own homes.

Previously we carried out an announced comprehensive inspection of this service on 9, 10, 12, 13 and 19 November 2015. The overall rating for this provider was judged as ‘Inadequate’ and the service was placed into ‘Special Measures’ by the Care Quality Commission. As a result of this a Notice of Decision was served whereby the provider was not able to undertake any further care packages without the written agreement of the Care Quality Commission. The provider shared with us a revised action plan on 4 June 2016 detailing what they would do to meet legal requirements. In addition to this we met with the provider on 10 June 2016 to discuss their action plan and our future regulatory arrangements. Whilst significant progress had been met to meet the majority of regulatory requirements minor improvements were still required in relation to the provider’s arrangements for recruitment and staff induction.

The service did not have a registered manager in post. At the time of the inspection the provider had employed a manager and they subsequently confirmed that an application to be formally registered with the Care Quality Commission had been submitted and they were expecting confirmation of their ‘fit person’ interview. Following the inspection the Care Quality Commission were made aware that the proposed manager was no longer employed by the organisation. 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 taken steps to address the shortfalls found at the last inspection in November 2015. This included implementing systems and arrangements to monitor the quality and safety of the service. However, improvements were required to ensure that changes and improvements are embedded and sustained over time to ensure people are provided with a consistently safe quality service. Recruitment practices required further review and strengthening so as to ensure that the provider’s arrangements were safe and met future compliance with this regulation. Additionally, although there was information to suggest that staff employed at the service had received an appropriate induction, there was a lack of supporting documentation to confirm if these arrangements were robust.

Appropriate arrangements were in place to assess and manage risks to people’s safety. Risks for people had been identified or anticipated and there were sufficient staff available to meet people’s care and support needs at this time. People’s healthcare needs were identified to ensure that they received suitable care and support from staff. People where appropriate were supported to have their nutritional and hydration needs met. People confirmed that there had not been any missed calls and staff stayed for the full amount of time allocated to ensure they received care and support as they should.

People spoke positively about the way staff treated them and reported that they received appropriate care. Staff demonstrated a good knowledge and understanding of the people they cared for and supported. People told us that their personal care and support was provided in a way which maintained their privacy and dignity. We found that people’s care plans reflected current information to guide staff on the most appropriate care and support people required to meet their needs.

Staff had received applicable training to enable them to deliver care and support to people who used the service. Formal arrangements were in place to ensure that staff were supported and received formal supervision and ‘spot visits’.

Complaint procedures were in place to enable people using the service, staff and others to raise concerns. People were aware of these and stated if required they felt confident to raise issues.