Archived: Heart Homecare Ltd

Updated 31 March 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 took place on 07 March 2017. This was Heart Homecare Ltd.'s first rated inspection since it was registered with us in 2015 and was announced. The provider was given 48 hours’ notice of the inspection as we needed to be sure that the office was open and staff would be available to speak with us. The inspection was carried out by one inspector.

The provider did not complete a Provider Information Return (PIR), because we carried out this inspection before a PIR could be requested. 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. Prior to the inspection we reviewed other information we held about the service, we looked at the previous inspection report and any notifications received by the Care Quality Commission. A notification is information about important events, which the provider is required to tell us about by law.

We visited the agency’s office in Sittingbourne area of Kent. We spoke with the provider who is also the registered manager. The provider/registered manager have many years of experience working within Health and Social care sectors. We also spoke with the administrator of the agency, the senior support worker and two care workers. Following the inspection visit we spoke with two people who used the service.

During the inspection visit, we reviewed a variety of documents. These included three people’s care records, which included care plans, health care notes, risk assessments and daily records. We also looked at three staff recruitment files, records relating to the management of the service, such as staff training programmes, audits, satisfaction surveys, staff rotas, policies and procedures.

We asked the registered manager to send additional information after the inspection visit, which included the training record, audits and business plan. The information we requested was sent to us in a timely manner.

Updated 31 March 2017

The inspection was carried out on 07 March 2017, and was an announced inspection. The provider was given 48 hours’ notice of the inspection as we needed to be sure that the office was open and staff would be available to speak with us.

Heart Homecare Ltd is a small domiciliary care agency which provides personal care and support for people living in their own homes. At the time of the inspection, the service was providing personal care to 13 people.

There was a registered manager at the service. The registered manager was also the provider. 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

The agency had suitable processes in place to safeguard people from different forms of abuse. Staff had been trained in safeguarding people and in the agency’s whistleblowing policy. They were confident that they could raise any matters of concern with the registered manager, or the local authority safeguarding team.

The agency provided sufficient numbers of staff to meet people’s needs and provide a flexible service.

The provider carried out risk assessments when they visited people for the first time. Other assessments identified people’s specific health and care needs, their mental health needs, medicines management, and any equipment needed. Care was planned and agreed between the agency and the individual person concerned. Some people were supported by their family members to discuss their care needs, if this was their choice to do so.

They had robust recruitment practices in place. Applicants were assessed as suitable for their job roles. Refresher training was provided at regular intervals. All staff received induction training at start of their employment.

The Care Quality Commission is required by law to monitor the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. The provider and staff understood their responsibilities under the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. However, staff had not received training on Mental Capacity Act (2005). We have made a recommendation about this.

People were supported with meal planning, preparation and eating and drinking. Staff supported people, by contacting the office to alert the provider to any identified health needs so that their doctor or nurse could be informed.

People said that they knew they could contact the provider at any time, and they felt confident about raising any concerns or other issues. The provider carried out spot checks to assess care staff’s work and procedures, with people’s prior agreement. This enabled people to get to know the provider.

The agency had processes in place to monitor the delivery of the service. As well as talking to the provider at spot checks, people could phone the office at any time.

People said that they knew they could contact the provider at any time, and they felt confident about raising any concerns or other issues.

People spoke positively about the way the agency was run. The management team and staff understood their respective roles and responsibilities. Staff told us that the registered manager was very approachable and understanding.