Background to this inspection
Updated
3 November 2023
Inspection team
We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Health and Social Care Act 2008.
Inspection team
The inspection was carried out by two inspectors and an assistant inspector.
Service and service type
This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats. The service provides short visits as well as 24-hour care and support.
This service is required to have a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the CQC to manage the service. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.
At the time of our inspection there was not a registered manager in post.
Notice of inspection
We gave the service one days' notice of the inspection. This was because we needed to be sure that the provider or registered manager would be in the office to support the inspection.
What we did before the inspection
We reviewed information we held about the service and the provider which included any statutory notifications sent to the CQC. A notification is information about important events which the service is required to send us by law. The provider had completed a provider information return prior to this inspection. This is information we require providers to send us to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We used all this information to plan our inspection.
During the inspection
Inspection activity started on 6 October 2023 and ended on 11 October 2023. We visited the location’s office on 6 October 2023.
We reviewed I person’s care plans and risk assessments. We reviewed 3 recruitment files, staff training and supervision. We also reviewed other records relating to the management of the service. We met with 3 staff during the office visit. We also spoke with the registered manager and the branch manager. We spoke with 4 relatives and 2 people who were receiving care and support. Following the office visit we contacted two healthcare professionals by email, but we did not receive a response.
Updated
3 November 2023
About the service
Network Healthcare Professionals Limited - Plymouth is a domiciliary care agency. The service provides personal care to people living in their own homes. At the time of our inspection there were 6 people, including 2 people who required 24-hour support, who were in receipt of the regulated activity of personal care.
The Care Quality Commission (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
There were sufficient staff employed to cover the visits required by people.
Staff were provided with adequate travel time to enable them to carry out visits at the time of the person’s choosing. Staff had sufficient time to meet people’s needs. People confirmed their visits were made as planned.
Risks were identified, assessed and recorded. Any environmental risks to visiting staff were also assessed.
There were systems to help protect people from abuse and to investigate any allegations, incidents or accidents.
People told us they felt safe when being supported by staff. One relative told us, “Yes, absolutely, I am very happy. The big thing is that they treat (Person’s name) with care and dignity” and “Yes, my husband feels safe, and they are very kind and friendly.”
There were robust systems and processes in place when staff supported people with their financial transactions, such as purchasing shopping etc.
Care plans were completed for each person and contained details of the person’s needs and preferences. Care plans were reviewed regularly to help ensure they were up to date and relevant.
Recruitment processes were robust, and new staff had sufficient support during their induction before working alone with people. Staff told us they felt well supported at all times. One told us, “There is always someone we can call any time of day. If necessary, they will come out and help us.”
The provider had implemented effective quality assurance systems to monitor the quality and safety of the service provided. Spot checks were carried out to monitor staff performance. Audits of all aspects of the service were completed by the registered manager and shared with the provider. There was a service improvement plan in place to help ensure the service remained compliant with the regulations.
People told us they were regularly asked for their views and experiences of the service provided. Comments included, “Oh yes, they do send surveys, we had one about a fortnight ago and they often ring up and ask us if there is anything they can do to improve” and “Yes, they send surveys and ring to check in with me.”
People and their relatives spoke positively about staff and told us they were happy with the service they received. We were told staff were friendly, they were treated with kindness and compassion and their privacy and dignity was respected. Comments included, “I am very appreciative of care and I have no problem with it at all and some of them go above and beyond - they are wonderful.”
People were supported by staff who had been appropriately trained and were skilled in their role. When a new package of care was accepted, for a person with specific care needs, staff were provided with the required training to help ensure they were competent to meet those needs.
People received support to maintain good health and were supported to maintain a balanced diet where this was part of their care plan. Staff monitored some people’s food and drink intake as well as their weight. They also worked closely with healthcare professionals to help ensure people were as healthy as possible.
Staff understood the importance of respecting people's diverse needs and promoting independence. People were always asked for their consent prior to care being provided.
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. Staff worked closely with the Court of Protection when required to restrict people in any way.
There were clear lines of responsibility which were known and understood by the staff team.
There was a registered manager at the time of this inspection.
For more information, please read the detailed findings section of this report. If you are reading this as a separate summary, the full report can be found on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection:
The last rating for this service was good (18 August 2018).
Why we inspected
This inspection was prompted by a review of the information we held about this service.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.