Aid With Care Limited

Updated 6 October 2022

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. 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 an inspector and an Expert by Experience. An Expert by Experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

Service and service type

Kingspark Business Centre is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own homes.

Registered manager

This service is required to have a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission 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 a registered manager in post.

Notice of inspection

We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection. This was because we needed to be sure that the registered manager would be in their office to support the inspection.

Inspection activity started on 16 September 2022 and ended on 21 September 2022. We visited the provider’s office on the second day of this inspection.

What we did before the inspection

We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. We used the information the provider sent us in the provider information return (PIR). This is information providers are required to send us annually with key information about their service, what they do well, and improvements they plan to make. We used all this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection

We spoke with the registered manager and the nominated individual when we visited the providers office. The nominated individual is responsible for supervising the management of the service on behalf of the provider.

We also received telephone and/or email feedback from five people using the service, eight relatives, two community health and social care professionals and six care staff in relation to their views and experiences of using, working with or for this home care agency.

Records we looked as part of this inspection included, five people’s care plans, four staff files in relation to their recruitment, training and supervision, and a variety of other records relating to the overall management and governance of the agency.

After we visited the provider’s office we continued to seek clarification from them to validate evidence found. We requested the provider send us additional evidence after our inspection in relation to staff training.

Updated 6 October 2022

About the service

Kingspark Business Centre is a domiciliary care agency providing personal care to people living in their own homes. At the time of our inspection 43 older people were receiving personal care at home from this provider.

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

People using the service, their relatives and community social care professionals all told us they were satisfied with the standard of care and support provided by this home care agency. For example, one relative said, “I have been blown away with the consistently excellent care my [family member] gets from this agency.” While a second relative added, “I am very impressed and happy with the service we received. I know my [family member] is in safe hands.”

People were kept safe and protected against the risk of avoidable harm and abuse. People received consistently good-quality and safe care from the same group of staff who were familiar with their needs and preferences. The fitness and suitability of staff to work in adult social care had been thoroughly assessed as part of the providers robust recruitment procedures. Staff followed current best practice guidelines regarding the prevention and control of infection, including those associated with COVID-19. The provider had measures in place to mitigate the risks associated with COVID-19 related staff workforce pressures. Medicines were well-organised and people received their prescribed medicines as and when they should.

Staff who had the right mix of knowledge, skills and support to deliver good-quality, safe care. Assessments of people’s support needs and wishes were carried out before they started receiving any care at home support from this agency. Where staff were responsible for assisting people to eat and drink, people’s dietary needs and wishes were met. People were supported to stay healthy and well, and to access relevant community health and social care services as and when required. 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.

People were treated equally and had their human rights and diversity respected, including their cultural and spiritual needs and wishes. Staff treated people with dignity and upheld their right to privacy. People typically described staff as “polite” and “kind”. People were encouraged and supported to maintain their independent living skills and do as much for themselves as they were willing and capable of doing so safely.

People's care plans were person-centred, which helped staff provide them with the individualised care at home they needed. Staff ensured they communicated and shared information with people in a way they could easily understand. People were encouraged to make decisions about the care and support they received at home and staff respected their informed choices. Where appropriate, people's end of life wishes and contacts were known and recorded for staff to refer to.

People were all complimentary about the way the office-based managers ran the service, and how approachable they were. The managers promoted an open and inclusive culture which sought the views of people, their relatives and staff. The provider worked in close partnership with other health and social care professionals and agencies to plan and deliver people's packages of care at home.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection and update

The last rating for this service was good (published 10 April 2020).

Why we inspected

The inspection was prompted in part due to concerns received about staff sometimes being late for their scheduled visits. A decision was made for us to inspect and examine those risks.

We found no evidence during this inspection that people were at risk of harm from this concern. Please see the relevant safe key question section of this full report.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect. If we receive any concerning information, we may inspect sooner.