Archived: City of London

Updated 14 January 2017

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check 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.

The inspection was carried out on 13 December 2016 and was announced. The inspection was undertaken by a single inspector.

Before the inspection we reviewed relevant information that we had about the provider.

During the inspection we spoke with the assistant director of people services, the service manager, the team manager (registered manager), a senior social worker, a senior occupational therapist, human resources manager and two re-ablement care staff. We looked at three care plans, which consisted of people receiving personal care in their own home and five historic care plans for people that used to receive personal care. We reviewed two staff files and looked at documents linked to the day to day running of the service including a range of policies and procedures.

After the inspection we spoke with two people and briefly spoke to one relative.

Updated 14 January 2017

We carried out an inspection of City of London on 13 December 2016. This was an announced inspection where we gave the provider less than 24 hours’ notice because we needed to ensure someone would be available to speak with us.

City of London is a local authority based in the city of London. City of London has a re-ablement service providing personal care to the residents of city of London in their own home. The service offers support to people that had just left hospital or were recovering from a recent illness or injury. The service provides short-term, intensive support to help people with everyday tasks that includes personal care. At the time of our inspection there were three people who received personal care and support from two re-ablement care staff.

The service was last inspected on 2 September 2014 and was meeting the required standards at the time of the inspection.

The service had a registered manager in place. 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.

Risk assessments had been completed in full for most people that identified risks and provided information on how to mitigate those risks. Falls risk assessment had not been completed for one person at risk of falls. This was completed promptly during the inspection.

People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. People and relatives we spoke with told us they were happy with the support received from the service and they felt safe around staff. Staff knew how to identify abuse, the different types of abuse and how to report abuse.

Staff had been trained on the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and knew the principles of the act. Care plans detailed people’s capacity and limitations to make decisions.

Internal audits were being carried out on care plans, which listed the findings and follow up actions required. Quality assurance meetings were held with management for service improvements.

Staff told us they were supported by the management team and had received regular supervision. Records confirmed this.

Team meetings were being held and recorded.

Staff had regular training in key area’s to ensure knowledge and skills were kept up to date.

People we spoke to told us that staff communicated well with them and with their family members. People’s ability to communicate were recorded in their care plans.

There were sufficient numbers of staff available to meet people’s needs.

Pre-employment checks had been undertaken to ensure staff were suitable for the role.

There was a formal complaints procedure and a complaints booklet that was provided to people. Staff knew how to respond to complaints.

People were encouraged to be independent and their privacy and dignity was maintained.