Background to this inspection
Updated
5 May 2022
Inspection team
We carried out this performance review and assessment under Section 46 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act). We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements of the regulations associated with the Act and looked at the quality of the service to provide a rating.
Unlike our standard approach to assessing performance, we did not physically visit the office of the location. This is a new approach we have introduced to reviewing and assessing performance of some care at home providers. Instead of visiting the office location we use technology such as electronic file sharing and video or phone calls to engage with people using the service and staff.
Inspection team
The inspection was carried out by one inspector.
Service and service type
This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own homes.
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 it is a small service and we needed to be sure that a member of staff would be available to support the inspection.
What we did before the inspection
We reviewed information we held about the service. The provider was not asked to complete a Provider Information Return (PIR) prior to this inspection. A PIR is information providers send us to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.
We used all of this information to plan our inspection.
During the inspection
Inspection activity started on 10 March and ended on 28 March 2022.
This was an ‘inspection using remote technology’. This means we did not visit the office location and instead used technology such as electronic file sharing to gather information, and video and phone calls to engage with people using the service as part of this performance review and assessment.
We spoke with the registered manager of the service and two care workers. We attempted contact with two people who used the service and spoke with one family member of a person who used the service We reviewed records of care and support for two people who used the service. We looked at records of recruitment and training for three care workers. We also reviewed records related to the management of the service including policies, complaints, audits and communication with staff.
Updated
5 May 2022
About the service
Plus Care Services is a domiciliary care agency. It provides support to older people and younger people with learning disabilities who live in their own homes. At the time of the inspection it was providing personal care to two people.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People benefitted from support from care workers who spoke their language and understood their cultural and religious needs. A family member spoke of the service being responsive to their changing needs and being able to access support whenever they needed it and told us “I give them five stars.”
People were safeguarded from abuse as staff understood their responsibilities to report abuse and were confident that this would be taken seriously. Risks to people’s wellbeing were assessed with clear plans to mitigate these risks and ensure that people were supported with transfers and hoisting safely.
There were enough staff to meet people’s needs and recruitment procedures were followed to make sure staff were suitable for their roles. The service did not support anybody with their medicines but had suitable procedures in place to do so in future. Care workers had access to personal protective equipment, training and regular testing to protect people from the risk of COVID-19.
People’s care needs were assessed in a way which took account of their cultural needs and preferences. Care workers received appropriate training and supervision to meet people’s needs safely. People’s health and dietary needs were assessed with care plans in place to meet these.
People were supported to understand documents when English was not their first language or when they were unable to read but documents were not routinely offered in alternate formats to help people understand these.
People were treated with dignity and respect and had their choices and views respected. Managers carried out regular checks to ensure that people received good quality, responsive care. The registered manager promoted an open culture in the service with regular engagement with people and care workers. People using the service and care workers told us they could always reach a manager if they required advice or support.
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.
For more information, please read the detailed findings section of this report. If you are reading this as a separate summary, the full report can be found on the Care Quality Commission (CQC) website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection:
We registered this service on 4 December 2019 and this was the first inspection.
Why we inspected
This inspection was prompted by a review of the information we held about this service.
Recommendations
We have made two recommendations about how the service assesses people’s mental capacity regarding specific decisions and how it offers documents in alternative formats to people. We will check if the provider has acted on any recommendation at our next inspection.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.
This was an ‘inspection using remote technology’. This means we did not visit the office location and instead used technology such as electronic file sharing to gather information, and video and phone calls to engage with people using the service as part of this performance review and assessment.