Jardine Care Limited t/a Home Instead Senior Care

Updated 23 November 2018

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is 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.

This inspection took place on 8 October 2018 and was announced. The provider was given 48 hours’ notice because the location provides a domiciliary care service and the registered manager is sometimes out of the office supporting CAREGivers or visiting people who use the service. We needed to be sure that the registered manager would be available to speak with us on the day of our inspection.

The inspection was carried out by one inspector. An expert by experience phoned users of the service after the inspection to gain their views on the service they received. An expert by experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

Before our inspection we reviewed information we held about the service. This included statutory notifications received from the provider since the last inspection and the Provider Information Return (PIR). The PIR is a form we asked the provider to complete prior to our visit which gives us some key information about the service, including what the service does well, what the service could do better and improvements they plan to make.

During the inspection we spoke with the registered manager, the provider and six office based staff, with a mix of care supervisors and other care managers. We also spoke with five CAREGivers. We reviewed the care records of six people who used the service, and looked at the records of five staff and other policies and records relating to the management of the service.

During and after the inspection we spoke with 15 people who used the service or their relatives. We wrote to 10 external professionals from health and social care who work with the service or the people that receive a service from Home Instead to ask their opinion of the service. We received six replies.

Updated 23 November 2018

This inspection took place on 8 October 2018 and was announced. The provider was given 48 hours’ notice because the location provides a domiciliary care service and the registered manager is sometimes out of the office supporting CAREGivers or visiting people who use the service. We needed to be sure that the registered manager would be available to speak with us on the day of our inspection.

This was the first inspection of Jardine Care Limited t/a Home Instead Senior Care at its current location since its registration in June 2018.

Home Instead Senior Care provides domiciliary care and support to people living in the London Borough of Richmond and surrounding areas. Home Instead Senior Care is part of a franchise that delivers care to people in many areas of the United Kingdom. This includes personal care such as assistance with bathing, dressing, eating and assistance with medicines. The service also provides people with help and support in their day-to-day lives, such as housework, shopping, and companionship services and escorting people on visits or appointments.

The staff who support people are known as ‘CAREGivers,’ we have called them this in the report and other members of staff, or all the staff in general, are referred to as “staff”.

The service had a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the 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 service provided good quality care and support to people and we rated the service as Outstanding in the way it responded to people’s individual needs and how it was managed, where a culture of openness and support for staff was evident.

People’s feedback, and feedback from external professionals was consistently good. People gave feedback about their care and support which was unanimously positive and which emphasised the responsiveness and managerial support of the service. External agencies praised the management of the service and the quality of its staff, as well as for the initiatives the agency took in responding to the needs of people for community based contact with others.

People were exceptionally well supported by CAREGivers to engage in activities to stimulate and promote their overall wellbeing. The provider worked closely with organisations in the community and together they shared in initiatives to support people in activities outside of their home environment, such as day centres, clubs and lunches.

Staff told us that they felt very well supported in their role and that they enjoyed working for the service and would recommend it to anyone interested in a career in social care. We saw that staff were recruited and trained in such a way that people could be assured of receiving safe care from suitably qualified staff. Staff received on-going supervision and training, including personal one to one time with their managers, spot checks during work and appraisals at the end of the year. Training was actively encouraged and promoted and staff had completed all mandatory training, with some going beyond that to improve their knowledge on particular topics, such as dementia training.

People received safe care in their homes. CAREGivers could explain to us how to keep people safe from abuse and neglect. People had suitable risk assessments in place. The provider managed risks associated with people’s needs and their home environment to help keep people and staff safe.

Medicines were administered safely and people received their medicines as prescribed by staff qualified to administer medicines.

Staff provided support in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and there was an emphasis on respecting people’s dignity and receiving people’s consent before a service was provided. CAREGivers understood what was meant by acting in someone’s best interests in cases where people were unable to provide informed consent.

People were supported to eat and drink sufficient amounts to meet their needs. When required staff supported people to access a range of healthcare professionals

People’s needs were assessed before they started to use the service and care was planned and delivered in response to their needs. The provider had arrangements in place to respond appropriately to people’s concerns and complaints. The service provided exceptional support to people living in the community through their initiatives in providing community based resources such as lunch clubs and supper clubs, which responded to the risk of people feeling isolated in their homes.

People, staff and external agencies described the management as very open, approachable, positive and easy to get on with. Excellent systems were in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service. The provider had audit systems for staff training and supervision and received detailed audits from the Home Instead franchise national office. In addition, the service conducted its own annual audit of the service, including seeking feedback from people and staff and using this feedback to develop further.