We carried out a review of the data available to us about Right at Home Basingstoke & District 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 Right at Home Basingstoke & District, you can give feedback on this service.
Right at Home Basingstoke is a domiciliary care service providing personal care to 22 people in their own homes.
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.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People received support which was extremely responsive to their needs and reflected their preferences, choices and wishes in all aspects. Staff were highly skilled in supporting people to reduce their social isolation and engage them in their care and in activities which were of interest to them. The service provided outstanding end of life care.
Staff were exceptionally caring, compassionate and kind in their approach and reflected the values of the service, to treat people as they would one of their relatives. Staff respected people’s individuality, their identity and their independence. People and their families were supported to specify the care they wanted, and support plans were fully reflective of their wishes.
The service was safe, staff were vigilant to types of abuse or neglect and had been proactive in identifying concerns and reporting these. Medicines were managed safely. People’s risks were assessed, and their support plans guided staff to help minimise risks wherever possible.
Support was effective and reflected best practice guidance. Staff supported people effectively enabling them to have a good quality of life. People were supported to eat and drink enough. 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; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
The service was well-led with the senior management team driving high quality and continuous improvement in all aspects of care. There were robust arrangements in place to monitor the quality of the service and the performance of staff.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the Care Quality Commission (CQC) website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection
The last rating for this service was good (published 24 May 2017).
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.
The service had a registered manager who was appointed in October 2016. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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 operated a franchise system where individual branches were owned and operated by nominated individuals. The provider operated a robust selection process for prospective owners and provided comprehensive training prior to the service opening.
People were supported by staff who made them feel safe. People and relatives told us the continuity and consistency of staff was very good, which reassured them and lessened their anxiety. People were kept safe and protected from abuse because staff understood their role and responsibility in relation to safeguarding procedures.
The registered manager completed needs and risk assessments, which promoted people’s independence, while keeping them safe. Risks associated with people’s care and support needs were identified and managed safely to protect them from harm. Staff provided people’s care safely in accordance with the guidance contained within their care plans.
The care coordinator completed a weekly staffing analysis to ensure there were sufficient staff available to meet people’s needs. Rosters demonstrated that the required number of staff to meet people’s needs was always provided.
Staff had undergone relevant pre-employment checks as part of their recruitment, which had been verified by the provider. People were safe as they were cared for by staff whose suitability for their role had been assessed by the provider.
People’s medicines were administered safely, in accordance with the provider’s policy, by trained staff. Staff had received medicines management training and their competency was assessed by the registered manager. Staff felt confident managing medicines because their training had prepared them to do this.
Staff had the necessary skills and knowledge to provide the support required and delivered care in accordance with people’s support plans. People were supported by staff who had completed the provider’s required training and induction programme which enabled them to support people and meet their needs effectively.
Staff were supported by the management team to deliver effective care based on best practice, through an effective system of supervision, spot checks, appraisal and monthly staff meetings. Staff had received regular unannounced spot checks by the registered manager who had observed and assessed the quality of their care practice.
People’s human rights were protected by staff who demonstrated clear understanding of guidance and legislation relating to consent and mental capacity. The registered manager and staff had initiated best interests processes where required to ensure people’s human rights were protected.
People were supported to maintain a healthy balanced diet by staff who understood their dietary preferences and ensured they received sufficient to eat and drink.
Staff were alert to people’s changing needs and took prompt action to promote their health and wellbeing by ensuring they were referred to relevant health professionals where required. People were effectively supported by staff to ensure their health care needs were met.
Staff had developed caring relationships with people and knew about peoples’ needs and the challenges they faced. Staff understood people’s care plans and the events that had informed them. People and staff had two way conversations about topics of general interest that did not just focus on the person’s support needs. Staff had time to spend with people and consistently spoke with them in an inclusive manner, enquiring about their welfare and feelings.
People were involved in developing their personalised care plans which detailed their daily routines. The registered manager was committed to ensuring people were involved as much as they were able to be in the planning of their own care. There was guidance for staff about how to support people to promote their independence and maximise the opportunity to do things of their choice.
Staff understood people’s different communication needs and ensured they followed the guidance provided in people’s care plans to enable them to communicate their views.
When people were nearing the end of their life they received kind, compassionate care from staff who worked effectively in partnership with palliative care specialists.
People received person centred care that was responsive to their needs and focussed on them rather than the requirements of the service. People’s needs were assessed and regularly reviewed to ensure their care and support was responsive to changes identified. Staff were provided with the necessary information and guidance required to meet people’s needs.
People told us the service had actively involved them in decision-making about their care and where appropriate had involved people they wanted to support them with important decisions.
People’s and staff records were stored securely, protecting their confidential information from unauthorised persons.
People felt able to raise any issues or complaints with staff and were confident they would be listened to and that appropriate action would be taken to address their concerns. The registered manager investigated complaints, in accordance with the provider’s policy and responded to the complainant with the actions taken. The service was responsive to people’s feedback.
The registered manager and owner demonstrated clear and direct leadership. They were highly visible and regularly went out to provide care which inspired staff and built a good team spirit.
The ethos of the service was based on putting people first, listening to their concerns, treating them with dignity and respect, promoting their independence and choice, providing high quality consistent care whilst always striving to improve the service. Staff knew these values which we observed them demonstrate while delivering people’s day to day care.
The registered manager effectively operated systems to assure the quality of the service and drive improvements. Feedback from people, their relatives, and staff was sought to identify changes required to improve the quality of care people experienced. The provider’s audits were used to review changes implemented, and ensure all required actions had been taken.