Background to this inspection
Updated
8 February 2020
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 Care Act 2014.
Inspection team
The inspection was carried out by two inspectors.
Service and service type
This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats.
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. This was because it is a service that provides care to people in their homes and we needed to be sure that the provider or registered manager would be in the office to support the inspection. We visited the office location on the 2 December 2019 and one inspector completed two home visits.
What we did before the inspection
We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. We sought feedback from the local authority and professionals who work with the service. We used the information the provider sent us in the provider information return. 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 used all of this information to plan our inspection.
During the inspection
We spoke with two people who used the service about their experience of the care provided. We spoke with six members of staff including the provider, registered manager, office administrator, senior care workers and care workers. We reviewed a range of records. This included six people’s care records and multiple medicine records. We looked at four staff files in relation to recruitment and staff supervision. A variety of records relating to the management of the service, including policies and procedures were reviewed.
After the inspection
We spoke with a further three people who use the service and three relatives about their experience of the care provided. We continued to seek clarification from the provider to validate evidence found. We looked at training data and quality assurance records.
Updated
8 February 2020
About the service
Home Instead Bagshot is a care agency providing personal care to people in their homes. Not everyone who used the service received personal care. 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. At the time of the inspection they were supporting 64 people with the regulated activity who were aged 65 and over and were living with cognitive impairments such as dementia.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People told us that the service went “above and beyond” what they would expect from a care service. People who use the service told us, “They’re so helpful with every aspect of my life, they’re amazing” and “I don’t know what we would do without Home Instead” and “It’s like [person] has an extended family with Home Instead, they are so kind, considerate and brilliant at what they do.”
People, and where appropriate, their relatives were involved in care planning and received regular updates about people’s progress. Since our last inspection, the service had introduced an electronic call monitoring system for staff member’s smart phones which ensured up to date information was added to care plans. Where appropriate, relatives had access to log on to the system and review updates.
People’s privacy, dignity, equality and diversity were respected by all staff. People were encouraged to provide feedback to the staff and any suggestions were acted upon.
People were kept safe by staff who were appropriately trained and had been recruited safely. Medicine administration and infection control practices were safe. Where possible, staff and the management team learnt lessons from incidents and installed new practices to avoid reoccurrence going forward.
People were supported to have a balanced healthy diet that met their nutritional needs. People were supported to take part in hobbies and activities they enjoyed. The registered manager worked collaboratively with organisations to create more opportunities for people living with dementia to access the community.
Staff received regular supervision where they could express their views and provide suggestions to improve the service. Both people and staff stated they were supported well by the management team and people felt involved with decisions made relating to their care.
Staff supported people to access healthcare professionals and followed any advice given by them to ensure people received the correct care to meet their needs. There was a robust complaints procedure in place that ensured any concerns were fully investigated and the best outcome for the person was reached.
There were effective assurance systems in place that ensured standards of care were monitored. The provider proactively monitored the quality of the service, risk management plans, training for staff amongst other areas.
There was a positive culture within the service, led by the management team who provided strong leadership. Staff were proud to work for the service and felt they were an active part of an organisation where they mattered, people mattered and all voices were heard.
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 details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection
The last rating for this service was Good (published 2 March 2017)
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information 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.