Archived: London Care (Brentford)

We considered all the evidence we had gathered under the outcomes we inspected. We used the information to answer the five questions we always ask;

' Is the service caring?

' Is the service responsive?

' Is the service safe?

' Is the service effective?

' Is the service well led?

This is a summary of what we found-

Is the service safe?

People were cared for in a way which met their needs. There were enough staff available and these staff were suitably recruited, trained and supported. People's individual needs and the risks to their well-being had been assessed and recorded. The staff were aware of what to do if they found someone was unwell or something was wrong. The people who we spoke with said they knew who to contact if they were unhappy about anything and they told us that the agency had dealt with their concerns appropriately. There were appropriate procedures for safeguarding vulnerable people and the staff had been trained in these. The agency worked with the local authority to investigate and address any suspected abuse. Complaints had been investigated and acted upon.

Is the service effective?

People told us that they were happy with the care they received. They said the staff knew how to care for them and did this in a respectful way. They told us care workers usually arrived on time and stayed for the agreed length of time. One person said, 'I cannot fault them ' they are good at what they do and they do everything I want'. We spoke with the local authority that commissioned and paid for the care people received. They said they were happy the service was doing a good job and meeting the needs of people. The care workers knew what to do if someone's needs changed or they became unwell.

Is the service caring?

People were cared for by kind and attentive staff. They told us that the staff were caring, considerate and polite. One person said, 'my care worker is very efficient and does everything I want her to, the way I want it done'. The staff we spoke with told us that they had good relationships with the people they cared for and that they were happy in their work.

Is the service responsive?

People's needs were assessed before they started using the service and reassessed when needed. They met with the agency managers to review their care and were asked for their opinions on the service in person, over the telephone and through surveys. People told us they could ring the agency and request changes to their care. They said that they usually had the same regular care workers and they were happy with these.

Is the service well-led?

There were good systems for monitoring the quality of the service. Where problems had been identified these had been put right. People felt able to make complaints and felt their concerns were listened to. There was a clear staffing structure and the staff spoke positively about the manager of the service. They said they were well supported and given the training they needed. The people who use the service told us the office staff were polite and helpful. The agency branch is part of a larger organisation. The manager told us the organisation provided support with quality monitoring and with the support and recruitment of staff.

In this report the name of a registered manager appears who was not managing the regulatory activities at this location at the time of the inspection. Their name appears because they were still a Registered Manager on our register at the time.

London Care had reviewed how people's care was being delivered. Care plans had been reviewed and updated. New care planning documentation had been produced and the agency had started to implement this.

Staff had received refresher training in how to work with people safely. The field care supervisor had received training with regard to implementing the new care plan. There was a schedule of training and supervision for staff. Two field care supervisors had been recently recruited to review care plans and supervise care staff.

The provider was monitoring quality of service people receive and had acted on comments and complaints made by people who use the service.

People had their needs assessed and a care plan was available. The care plan stated the tasks to be carried out by the care worker but did not reflect the preferences of the person using the service.

There were policies and procedures for staff on protecting adults from abuse and reporting malpractice. Staff had received safeguarding vulnerable adults training.

London Care PLC (Brentford) was commissioned to provide care for people by the London Borough of Hounslow. At the time of the inspection London Borough of Hounslow was monitoring London Care PLC as there were a number of complaints about the quality of care. There were not enough staff in the management team to monitor people's care, supervise care workers and ensure care workers had received the required care skills training.