The Care Quality Commission
  • Services in your home
  • Homecare service

Archived: Homecare Plus

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Lyn Gilzean Court, St Ann's Well Road, Nottingham, Nottinghamshire, NG3 3GF (0115) 911 3370

Provided and run by:
Time-Out Care Services Ltd

All Inspections

3 October 2016

During a routine inspection

This announced inspection was carried out on 3 October 2016. Homecare Plus provides support and personal care to people living in their own home in Nottingham. On the day of the inspection there were 48 people using the service who received personal care.

The service had a registered manager in place at the time of our inspection. 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 were supported by staff who understood the risks people could face and knew how to make people feel safe. People were encouraged to be independent and risks were mitigated in the least restrictive way possible.

People were usually supported by a regular staff member or group of staff who they knew. People who required support to take their medicines received assistance to do so when this was needed.

People were provided with the care and support they wanted by staff who were trained and supported to do so. People’s human right to make decisions for themselves was respected and they provided consent to their care when needed.

People were supported by staff who understood their health conditions and ensured they had sufficient to eat and drink to maintain their wellbeing.

People were supported by staff who demonstrated kindness and understanding. People were involved in determining their care and support. They were shown respect and treated with dignity in the way they wished to be.

People were able to influence the way their care and support was delivered and they could rely on this being provided as they wished. People were informed on how to express any issues or concerns they had so these could be investigated and acted upon.

Improvements were being made to improve the quality of the service and to address the frustrations some people experienced. There were systems followed which identified areas of good practice and where improvements were needed.

5 October 2015

During a routine inspection

This inspection took place on 5 October 2015. Homecare Plus is a domiciliary care service which provides personal care and support to people in their own home in Nottingham. On the day of our inspection 67 people were using the service.

The service had a registered manager. 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.

Staff knew how to keep people safe and understood their responsibilities to protect people from the risk of abuse. People received the level of support they required to safely manage their medicines. Risks to people’s health and safety were managed and plans were in place to enable staff to support people safely. There were sufficient numbers of staff to meet people’s care needs and recruitment was on-going.

Staff had not provided with all of the knowledge and skills required to care for people effectively and staff did not receive regular supervision. People received the assistance they required to have enough to eat and drink.

The Care Quality Commission (CQC) monitors the use of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). The provider was aware of the principles of the MCA and how this might affect the care they provided to people. Where people had the capacity they were asked to provide their consent to the care being provided.

Positive and caring relationships had been developed between staff and people who used the service. People were involved in the planning and reviewing of their care and making decisions about what care they wanted. People were treated with dignity and respect by staff who understood the importance of this.

People received the care they needed and staff were aware of the different support each person needed. However, staff did not always arrive on time meaning there were delays in people receiving care. People felt able to make a complaint and knew how to do so. The complaints that had been received were responded to appropriately and in a timely manner.

People and staff were asked for their opinions about the quality of the service and action taken in response to their feedback. Quality monitoring systems required further development to fully assess the quality of the service. The culture of the service was open and honest, however the systems for communicating with staff were inconsistent.

19 December 2013

During a routine inspection

Prior to our inspection we reviewed all the information we had received from the provider. During the visit we spoke with six people who used the service and asked them for their views. We also spoke with two care workers, three team leaders, the manager and the nominated individual. We looked at some of the records held in the service including the care files for seven people.

We found people gave consent to their care and received care and support that met their needs. A person who used the service told us, 'They do what I want them to, and they speak nicely to me.' Another person said, 'I am happy with what they do, they come early in the morning and make my breakfast and wash me.'

We found that suitable arrangements were in place to manage people's medication and ensure they received any medication they needed. A person who used the service told us, 'The first thing they do is ask me if I have taken my tablets. If I haven't they bring me some water to take them with.'

We found the staff team were supported through training and the provider assessed and monitored the quality of the service. A person told us, 'They seem to be well trained to me, I trust them. Nobody has ever been rude to me.' Another person said, 'I would call the manager if there was a problem.'

6 July 2012

During a themed inspection looking at Domiciliary Care Services

We carried out a themed inspection looking at domiciliary care services. We asked people to tell us what it was like to receive services from this home care agency as part of a targeted inspection programme of domiciliary care agencies with particular regard to how people's dignity was upheld and how they can make choices about their care. The inspection team was led by a CQC inspector joined by an Expert by Experience who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of service.

We visited four people in their own home as part of this review and spoke with them and their relatives about their experiences of the support they have received. We spoke with three senior staff at the time of our visit to the office and with three care workers in person or by telephone.

We spoke with eight people who received a service from this agency over the telephone and five relatives. The majority of people spoke positively about their care workers saying they were respectful and they met their care needs. One person said, "we have three regular carers [care workers] and we're very pleased with them."

Most of the people we spoke with told us that their care was personalised and independence was encouraged. Some people said they were not always happy about the timings of their calls and changes to their regular care worker but people expressed a high level of satisfaction with the agency overall.

Most people felt the staff were well trained and understood their responsibilities. One person said, 'I think they're well trained. Some are better than others but overall they're not bad." However, other evidence did not support this and records showed there were gaps in staff training.

Effective systems that would enable the provider to identify and manage potential risks to the safety and welfare of people who use the service were needed.