Archived: Olive Branch Care Agency

Updated 4 September 2015

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection checked whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This inspection took place on 16 and 21 July 2015 and was announced. The manager was given 48 hours notice because the location provides a domiciliary care service, and we needed to ensure that the manager and other staff would be available to spend time with us. We also needed some information to be provided by the agency before we arrived. The inspection team consisted of one inspector and an expert by experience who had experience of caring for older people. An expert by experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service. The expert by experience contacted people who used the agency by telephone to gather their views about the service they received.

Before the inspection, we asked the provider to complete a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We reviewed the completed PIR and previous inspection reports before the inspection. We checked the information that we held about the service and the service provider. We spoke with an officer from the local quality monitoring team from the local authority to gather their views about the service.

We spoke with four people who received a service by telephone and one relative. We visited six people in their own homes with their permission, along with the care staff supporting them. We discussed with them the care that they received, saw how they were supported, and looked at the records that were kept in their homes. We spoke with seven members of staff about working for the agency, the care they gave people and the training and support they received.

We reviewed a range of records about people’s care and how the domiciliary care agency was managed. These included care records for eight people held at the agency office, four care staff files and other records relating to the management of the agency including training records, policies and procedures, staff rotas, records of audits, quality assurance systems and action plans for the development of the service.

Updated 4 September 2015

The inspection was announced and took place on 16 and 21 July 2015.

Olive Branch Care Agency is a domiciliary care agency that provides personal care and support to people in their own homes in the South Devon area. People who receive a service include younger people with physical support needs, as well as older people, some of whom may be living with dementia. At the time of this inspection the agency was providing a care service to over 70 people, but also provided domestic support such as gardening and cleaning services to many others. We did not inspect those activities as they did not fall under the CQC regulation. Frequency of visits varied depending on people’s individual needs, but the agency as a policy does not provide visits of less than half an hour.

At our last inspection of the service in August 2014 we had identified concerns over the staff recruitment process, training and support given to staff and the records kept by the agency. These had amounted to breaches of legislation. Following the inspection the provider had sent us a report telling us what they were going to do to put this right. On this inspection we saw that improvements had been made.

Some concerns on this inspection were expressed by people over scheduling and staff arriving at times other than those agreed in their care plan. The registered manager was aware of these concerns and was working to address them. Robust recruitment procedures were in place to help ensure that people were cared for by staff who were suitable to be working with potentially vulnerable people.

The service had a registered manager, who had been registered with the Care Quality Commission the week prior to our first visit. Like registered providers, registered managers 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.

Risks to people’s safety were assessed and reduced where possible. Risk assessments also covered risks to staff and risks presented by the environment in people’s homes. Staff understood how to keep people safe and how to report concerns about people’s welfare. They had received training in how to recognise safeguarding concerns and how to report them.

People received effective care from staff who had the appropriate skills and knowledge to meet their needs. Staff received support to carry out their role.

People were supported with their healthcare and dietary needs where this was a part of their care plan. Staff supported people in accordance with the Mental Capacity Act 2005, and people were asked for their consent to care before this was delivered.

People told us that staff respected their dignity and privacy, and were professional but caring in their relationships with them. People’s independence was encouraged to ensure that their skills and self-esteem were maintained. People were supported to express their views and to be involved in making decisions about their care and support. People or their relatives told us they felt equal partners in decision making and were involved in daily choices over their care.

Changes to people’s care needs were addressed by the service without delay. People told us the service responded to their wishes; staff were flexible, and made changes to the services being delivered, for example if they had an appointment.

People were actively encouraged to give their views and raise concerns or complaints. The service viewed concerns and complaints as a way of improving the service and any concerns were addressed promptly. People told us they were happy to raise concerns with the service’s management.

The registered manager was newly in post but had managed to take action to improve both the quality of care and morale of the staff group. They had a clear vision of how they wanted to progress the organisation and ensured that other staff shared that sense of purpose and ethos. Internal and external quality assurance processes had been recently established and were working to support improvements in the quality of the service. People told us they found the manager approachable, and the service had improved recently since they had been in post.

Records were improved. Audits were being undertaken and where there were areas not yet completed, such as training updates for all staff there were robust plans in place to ensure they were actioned.

We have made a recommendation regarding monitoring the personal safety of staff while lone working.