Background to this inspection
Updated
19 June 2015
We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection checked whether the provider was 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 took place on 15 April 2015 and was announced. The provider was given 48 hours’ notice of the inspection as we needed to be sure that the office was open and staff would be available to speak with us. The inspection was carried out by one inspector.
We would normally ask the provider to complete a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks for some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. However, this inspection was planned in response to a concern we had received and there was not time to expect the provider to complete this information and return it to us. We gathered this key information during the inspection process.
Before the inspection we looked at previous inspection reports and notifications received by the Care Quality Commission (CQC). A notification is information about important events which the service is required to send us by law.
We visited the agency’s office, which was situated in a private house on a small estate near to Maidstone. We spoke with the provider and the manager of the agency. Following the inspection visit we spoke with five relatives of people who received support in their own homes and two members of staff.
During the inspection visit, we reviewed a variety of documents. These included four people’s care records and three staff recruitment files. We also looked at records relating to the management of the service, such as staff induction and training programmes; staffing allocations
The previous inspection was carried out in December 2013, and there were no breaches of the regulations. The service is in the process of moving offices and this has entailed new registration procedures for a move of their new location. The agency had completed the appropriate application of registration changes with the Care Quality Commission.
Updated
19 June 2015
The inspection was carried out on 15 April 2015, and was an announced inspection. The provider was given 48 hours’ notice of the inspection as we needed to be sure that the office was open and staff would be available to speak with us. We inspected this service due to concerns we had received. It was alleged that people were not being provided with personal care to a good standard.
Jasmine Care South East is a domiciliary care agency which provides personal care and support to older people and younger adults who are living in their own homes. At the time of the inspection, the service was providing support to 14 people, in Maidstone and the surrounding areas. Most people were funding their own care through direct payments. Some people were funded through NHS continuing care services.
The service is run by the provider and a manager. The manager has applied to the Commission to become the registered manager of the agency. 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 Care Quality Commission is required by law to monitor the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. The manager and staff understood their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005.
The agency had suitable processes in place to safeguard people from different forms of abuse. Staff had been trained in safeguarding people and in the agency’s whistleblowing policy. They were confident that they could raise any matters of concern with the provider or the manager, or the local authority safeguarding team. Staff were trained in how to respond in an emergency (such as a fire, or if the person collapsed) to protect people from harm.
The agency provided sufficient numbers of staff to meet people’s needs and provide a flexible service. Staff were able to accommodate last minute changes due to people’s appointments or staff sickness. Staff were allocated to people within a close range of each other, so that they would not have long distances to travel between attending to people. This ensured that staff would not be delayed from attending to people at the correct appointment times.
The agency had robust recruitment practices in place. Applicants were assessed as suitable for their job roles. Refresher training was provided at regular intervals.
All staff received induction training which included essential subjects such as maintaining confidentiality, moving and handling, safeguarding adults and infection control. They worked alongside experienced staff and had their competency assessed before they were allowed to work on their own.
The provider or the manager carried out risk assessments when they visited people for the first time. Other assessments identified people’s specific health and care needs, their mental health needs, medicines management, and any equipment needed. Care was planned and agreed between the agency and the individual person concerned. Some people were supported by their family members to discuss their care needs, if this was their choice to do so.
People were supported with meal planning, preparation and eating and drinking. Staff supported people, by contacting the office to alert the provider or manager to any identified health needs so that their doctor or nurse could be informed.
People said that they knew they could contact the provider or the manager at any time, and they felt confident about raising any concerns or other issues. The provider or the manager carried out spot checks to assess care staff’s work and procedures, with people’s prior agreement. This enabled people to get to know the provider and manager.
The agency had processes in place to monitor the delivery of the service. As well as talking to the provider or manager at spot checks, people could phone the office at any time, or speak to the senior person on duty for out of hours calls. People’s views were also obtained through annual surveys. These could be completed anonymously if people wished. The provider analysed these and checked how well people felt the agency was meeting their needs.