Archived: Able Community Care

Updated 29 May 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 was planned to check whether the provider was 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.

We inspected this service on 16 March 2015. The inspection was announced and undertaken by two inspectors.

For the inspection we visited the provider’s main office and spoke with the registered manager and care manager about the service provided. We looked at five people’s care records to see if their records were accurate and up to date. We reviewed staff recruitment files and further records relating to the management of the service.

Following our inspection we telephoned three people who used the service, one relative and five members of staff. We also contacted a number of health and social care professionals who knew the service well, including a social worker and two nurses.

Updated 29 May 2015

We inspected this service on 16 March 2015. The inspection was announced and undertaken by two inspectors.

Able Community Care provides live-in care staff to support people living in their own homes. The provider also runs a service to recruit live-in care workers who are introduced to private clients who require care in their own homes. Able Community Care does not directly employ these staff and this part of their service is not subject to regulation by the Care Quality Commission. At the time of our inspection Able Care provided care to ten people as part of their registered service.

There was a registered manager in post at the service. 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.

People were kept safe by staff who recognised the signs of potential abuse and knew what to do when safeguarding concerns arose. Potential risks to people’s health and well-being had been assessed and measures had been put in place by staff to reduce them and ensure people’s safety.

People received a very flexible and reliable care service. Care was provided from the same small team of carers who got to know people very well. It was clear that people had built up a good relationship with the staff and that staff respected their decisions. The provider’s recruitment and selection procedures were robust and meant that only experienced and suitable staff were employed.

Staff clearly enjoyed their job and were well supported in their work. They received an annual appraisal of their performance and staff who did not meet appropriate standards were removed from the provider’s register. Staff received some training for their role but improvement was needed to ensure they received regular training in medicines administration, and that their competency was regularly assessed to ensure people received their medicines safely. Staff would also benefit from having more in-depth training around the specific medical conditions of the people they supported. You can see what action we have told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.

People’s needs were fully assessed and regularly reviewed by the care manager. Their health was monitored and they were supported to see a wide range of health professionals if needed. However, people’s care plans needed more detail to ensure that staff had the information to provide safe and consistent care. People’s independence was encouraged and staff supported them to lead active lives.

Overall, the service was well managed, with clear lines of accountability and responsibility in place for staff. There were good systems in place to monitor and assess the quality of care people experienced, and people’s views were actively sought to develop the service. However the provider’s audit systems had failed to identify the poor quality of information contained in some people’s care plans. The registered manager did not fully appreciate the importance of staff development and training to ensure that people were cared for by knowledgeable staff whose practice was kept up to date.