Archived: Halo Homecare

Updated 3 June 2017

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 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 comprehensive inspection took place on 18 April 2017 and was announced. The location provides a domiciliary care service and the registered manager was sometimes out of the office supporting care workers 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.

Before the inspection CQC sent out 18 questionnaires to people using the service, their relatives, community based health and social professionals and staff who worked for the agency to get their views about the service. We received two completed questionnaires from people using the service, none from relatives, and one from a community professional and six from staff.

During the inspection we went to the provider’s head office and spoke with the registered manager, who is also a director of the company, one other director of the company, the office administrator and two care staff. We reviewed the care records of five people who used the service, and looked at the records of four staff and other records relating to the management of the service.

The provider gave us a list of people who used the service or their families and a list of staff. On the second day of the inspection we emailed a short questionnaire to 10 staff and one relative of people using the service and invited them to either reply to the email or call us and answer the questions. Seven staff and one relative replied to our email questionnaire. We also telephoned 16 people or their relatives after the inspection and spoke with four people who used the service and five relatives of people who used the service of Halo Homecare.

Updated 3 June 2017

Halo Homecare provides domiciliary care and support to 40 people living in their own homes in Kingston and surrounding areas. This service includes assistance with bathing, dressing, eating and medicines, home help covering all aspects of day-to-day housework, shopping, meal preparation and household duties. We only looked at the service for people receiving personal care during this inspection as this is the service that is regulated by CQC.

At the last Care Quality Commission (CQC) inspection in October 2015, the overall rating for this service was Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good. The service demonstrated they continued to meet the regulations and fundamental standards.

People remained safe in their homes. Staff 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 homes, to help keep people and staff safe. Recruitment practices remained safe. Medicines continued to be administered safely. The checks we made confirmed that people were receiving their medicines as prescribed by staff qualified to administer medicines.

People continued to be supported by staff who received appropriate training and support. Staff had the skills, experience and a good understanding of how to meet people’s needs. People told us that staff encouraged them to make their own decisions and gave them the encouragement, time and support to do so. Staff were providing support in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005. 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 and relatives told us staff were caring, kind and efficient and staff respected their privacy and treated them with dignity.

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.

Staff we spoke with described the management as very open, approachable, positive and easy to get on with. Systems were in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service. The provider had effective quality assurance systems to monitor the scheme’s processes. These systems continue to help ensure people received the care they needed as detailed in their support plans.