Background to this inspection
Updated
15 June 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 carried out the site visit. Two inspectors made telephone calls to gather feedback from people.
Service and service type
This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care and support to people living in their own homes.
The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. 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.
Notice of inspection
We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection visit because we needed to be sure the registered manager would be available to support the inspection.
Before the inspection
We used the information the provider sent us in the provider information return (PIR). This is information providers are required to send us with key information about their service, what they do well, and improvements they plan to make. This information helps support our inspections.
We reviewed the evidence we had about the service. This included any notifications of significant events, such as serious injuries or safeguarding referrals. Notifications are information about important events which the provider is required to send us by law.
During the inspection
Inspection site visit activity started and ended on 16 May 2019. We visited the office location on this date to see the registered manager and to review care records and policies and procedures.
We checked care records for three people, including their assessments, care plans and risk assessments. We looked at four staff files and records of staff training and supervision. We also checked records including satisfaction surveys, complaints, accident and incident records, quality monitoring checks and audits.
After the inspection
We spoke with four people who used the service and four relatives by telephone to hear their views about the care and support provided. Two people sent us feedback about the agency by email. We received feedback from six staff about the training and support they received from the agency to carry out their roles.
Updated
15 June 2019
Longdene Homecare Ltd (Surrey Heath & Berkshire) is a domiciliary care agency that was supporting 75 people at the time of the inspection. Not everyone using the service receives a regulated activity; 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 consider any wider social care provided. Most of the people using the service were older people although some were younger adults who needed support due to healthcare conditions.
People’s experience of using this service:
People received their care from consistent staff who knew their needs well. People had established positive relationships with their regular care workers and enjoyed their company. Staff were kind and caring and treated people with respect.
Staff received the training they needed to provide safe care. This included all elements of mandatory training during their induction and regular refresher training in key areas. Staff met regularly with their managers for supervision, which enabled them to discuss their performance and any further training needs.
Staff understood their roles in safeguarding people from abuse and felt able to speak up about any concerns they had. The provider’s recruitment procedures helped ensure only suitable staff were employed. Potential risks to people and staff had been assessed and measures put in place to minimise these. Medicines were managed safely and staff maintained appropriate standards of infection control.
Staff monitored people’s health and reported any concerns they had about people’s wellbeing. This enabled people’s relatives or the management team to arrange appropriate healthcare input. The agency worked effectively with other professionals, such as GPs, district nurses and pharmacists, to ensure people received the care they needed.
People’s care plans were personalised and reflected their individual needs and preferences. Care plans were regularly reviewed to take account of any changes in people’s needs. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
The management team had a good oversight of the service and provided good support to care staff. The provider had appropriate quality monitoring systems, which included seeking the views of people and families. The care that staff provided was monitored through spot checks carried out by the management team.
People knew how to complain and were confident any concerns they raised would be addressed. People who had complained in the past told us the service they received had improved as a result.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection:
At the last inspection the service was rated Good (report published on 29 November 2016).
Why we inspected:
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
Follow up:
We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.