Background to this inspection
Updated
4 May 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 this inspection on the 5 and 11 April 2019. 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 telephoned people that used the service to gain their feedback.
Service and service type:
Austen Allen Homecare, Dartford, is a domiciliary care agency providing personal care to people in their own homes. CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also take into account any wider social care provided.
The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they 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 registered manager 48 hours’ notice of our inspection as Austen Allen Homecare, Dartford, is a community based service and we needed to be sure the registered manager and staff would be available. The expert by experience made calls to people and relatives of people that used the service on the 5 April 2019. We visited the office location on 5 April 2019, to see the registered manager and office staff; and to review care records, staff records and policies and procedures. We spoke with members of staff on the telephone on the 11 April 2019.
What we did:
We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection, in February 2018. This included details about incidents the provider must notify us about, such as abuse or serious injury. Due to a technical difficulty we did not ask the provider to complete a 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.
During the inspection,
• we spoke with three people;
• 11 relatives of people that used the service;
• six care staff, the registered manager; care advisor; the lead co-ordinator; the training manager and a trainee assistant.
• We reviewed a range of records.
• This included six people's care records and medicine records.
• We also looked at five staff files recruitment, assessment and supervision and support.
• We reviewed records relating to the management of the service, staff training and policies and procedures.
Updated
4 May 2019
About the service:
Austen Allen Homecare, Dartford, is a domiciliary care agency registered to provide personal care for people who require support in their own home. The Dartford office is one of two locations the provider has registered with CQC.
CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’ and help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also take into account any wider social care provided. At the time of our inspection, the service was supporting 55 people, all of whom received some element of personal care. Austen Allen Homecare provide care services mainly to people living in the Dartford and surrounding areas.
Following the last inspection, we asked the provider to complete an action plan to show what they would do and by when to improve the key questions, Safe and Well-led, to at least Good. We found that the provider had undertaken actions in their action plan.
People’s experience of using this service:
• People told us they felt safe with staff. People when asked if they felt safe said, “Yes, I do feel safe”, “Yes I do, they are doing it right”, and “I do when regular carers come.”
• People had good relationships with staff, who were knowledgeable of their physical and emotional needs, as well as likes, dislikes and interests. Staff were responsive to changes in people's health needs. If needed, they sought advice from relevant professionals.
• People felt included in planning their care. Care plans were person centred, achieved good outcomes and showed people were offered choice and involved wherever possible.
• People’s rights and their dignity and privacy were respected. One relative said, “Staff respect their relative” and another relative said, “Staff are caring and compassionate.”
• Staff supported people to maintain a balanced diet and monitor their nutritional health.
• Medicines were stored and managed safely in people’s homes. There were policies and procedures in place for the safe administration of medicines. Staff followed these policies and had been trained to administer medicines safely.
• People received care from staff who were well supported with induction, training and ongoing supervision.
• People knew how to complain and that any concerns would be listened and responded to by the provider. Actions were taken as a response to complaints.
• Feedback from people and relatives was sought and used to make improvements.
• The provider had made changes to improve the service for people. An electronic care planning and monitoring system had been implemented to make sure that people’s needs were being met and people told us that they had been involved with this.
• Quality monitoring systems included audits, checks on staff practice and checks on people's satisfaction with the service they received, using questionnaires.
• The provider has systems in place to ensure they kept up to date with developments in the sector and changes in the law.
• Lessons were learnt and used to make improvements.
• The service was led by an experienced, competent manager who understood their role and responsibilities, as did staff. The service had a clear management structure and people had confidence in the manager and provider.
Rating at last inspection: This service was rated, ‘Requires Improvement’ at the last inspection on 19 February 2018. This was because processes were not fully in place in relation to robust medicine recording, recruitment process and auditing systems
At this inspection, we found that improvements had been made and the service met the characteristics of Good in all domains.
Why we inspected: This was a planned comprehensive inspection to follow up on the issues raised at the last inspection.
Follow up: We will continue to monitor the service through the information we receive.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk