We carried out a review of the data available to us about Quality Health and Homecare Services Ltd on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Quality Health and Homecare Services Ltd, you can give feedback on this service.
Quality Health and Home Care Service is registered to provide personal care to people in their own homes. Quality Health and Home Care Service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own homes. At the time of this inspection visit, 11 people received personal care.
There was a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission 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.
At the last inspection in March 2016 the service was rated as Good. At this inspection we found the quality of care had been maintained and people continued to receive a service that was well led, providing safe, caring, effective and responsive care and support that met their needs. The rating remains 'Good'.
People felt safe using the service and staff understood how to protect people from abuse and harm. There were procedures to keep people safe and manage identified risks to people’s care.
People had a detailed assessment of their health and social care needs before they used the service. Care plans contained detailed information to enable staff to provide people with the appropriate care and support for their needs. People’s care needs were regularly reviewed. The care manager maintained regular contact with people, or their relatives, to check the care provided was what people needed and expected. People and their relatives told us staff were reliable and stayed for the time needed. People were treated with dignity and respect.
Where medicines were administered, staff were trained and assessed as competent to do so safely. The provider had a recruitment process that had suitable checks to ensure that prior to staff starting work they were suitable to support people who used the service.
People knew how to complain and information about making a complaint was available for people when they started using the service. There was a system to log and action any complaints or concerns that people had raised.
Staff felt there could be better access to training, although all staff felt they were supervised and supported in their roles. People were assisted to access health services when needed and staff worked well with other health and social care professionals.
The principles of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) were followed by staff. People’s decisions and choices were respected and people felt involved in their care. People were supported to have choice and control of their lives and staff sought permission before assisting them.
Effective governance systems provided the registered manager with an overview of areas such as care records, medicine records and call times to assure themselves, people received a service they expected.
There was a registered manager in place for this service. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission 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.
People who used the service had no concerns about the care and support they received and told us they felt safe when with staff members. People had confidence in the service provided and told us they were well cared for and supported by staff members who knew them and understood their needs. Staff were aware of the risks involved in the care and support they offered to people.
Staff were aware of the actions they would need to take to take to report abuse and concerns regarding people’s welfare. Staff were able to explain how they kept people safe from harm and risks.
People told us they were treated with respect and their dignity and privacy was up held by the staff who cared for them. People received care and support from regular staff members who they liked and found to be caring and kind.
Staff had knowledge about people’s care needs and how these were to be met. People told us their consent was obtained before care and support was provided.
People received support with preparing meals were this was needed. In addition people were supported to take their medicines as prescribed and staff supported people to have their healthcare needs met. People were confident they would receive suitable support if they were unwell.
The provider was recruiting new staff to ensure sufficient staff were available in the areas where they were providing a service for people. Before new staff started working for the provider checks were carried out. Induction training was in place to support new staff members. Induction training including spending time with experienced members of staff and getting to know people who used the service was in place. Staff were supported by the management team and received training to enable them to fulfil their role.
Staff were aware of people’s care needs. However records held at the office were not always either available or up to date. The care manager was aware of improvements which needed to be made.
During this inspection we spoke on the telephone with three people who used the agency, one relative and one member of staff. We spoke with the provider, manager and two care staff at the agency office.
People we spoke with were complimentary about the care and support that they received. One person said the staff were: "Absolutely excellent, the whole team'. People told us that they felt involved in any decisions that needed to be made about their care and these were made in their best interests.
We found that proper steps had been taken to ensure that individualised care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure people's safety and welfare.
Staff had been recruited in an appropriate way and checks had been undertaken that ensured they were suitable to care for vulnerable people.
The provider had a system of audits in place to enable them to monitor the quality of the service provided and ensure that people received appropriate care and treatment.
We found that any comments and complaints people made were responded to appropriately.