Archived: Homebased Care (UK) Ltd

Updated 13 May 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.

This inspection took place on 18, 19 and 24 October 2016 and was announced. We gave the provider 48 hours’ notice of the inspection. This is because we needed the provider to obtain consent from people using the service that they were happy to share with us their experiences about their care. We also needed to ensure someone would be as in the service provides domiciliary care. The inspection team consisted of one inspector and an Expert by Experience. An Expert by Experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

As part of the inspection we reviewed the information we held about the service. We looked to see if statutory notifications had been sent by the provider. A statutory notification contains information about important events which the provider is required to send to us by law. We sought information and views from the local authority. We also reviewed information that had been sent to us by the public. We used this information to help us plan our inspection.

During the inspection we spoke with 13 people who used the service and four relatives. We spoke with the compliance manager, the quality manager, a coordinator and four care staff. We reviewed records relating to four people’s medicines, four people’s care records and records relating to the management of the service; including recruitment records, complaints and quality assurance.

Updated 13 May 2017

The inspection took place on 18,19 and 24 October 2016 and was announced. At the last inspection completed on 12 February 2014 the provider was meeting all of the legal requirements we inspected. Homebased Care (UK) Ltd is a domiciliary care service that provides personal care to people living in their own home. At the time of the inspection Homebased Care (UK) Ltd were providing services to 42 people, most of whom were older people living with dementia.

Homebased Care (UK) Ltd is registered to provide personal care services from the location of 34 Lichfield Street, Walsall, WS1 1TJ. The provider had moved from this location and had failed to amend this condition of their registration. The provider was now providing personal care from The Rock Church Centre, 27-31 Lichfield Street, Walsall, WS1 1TJ. This was the location from which we completed our inspection.

There had been no registered manager in post since February 2014. 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 not protected from the risk of abuse due to the provider’s failure to ensure safeguarding incidents were recognised, reported and investigated appropriately. People were protected by a staff team who did understand how to manage hazards in order to reduce the risk of harm such as injury. However, people were not sufficiently protected as accidents and incidents were not always recorded and monitored by the provider.

People were happy with the support they received with their medicines. However, records relating to the administration of medicines were not always completed clearly to demonstrate the support provided. People were supported by staff who had been recruited safely.

People felt most staff had the skills required to support them effectively. People were supported to provide consent on a day to day basis when they received care. However, where people lacked mental capacity, decisions were not always made on their behalf in their best interests in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

People were given the support they needed to meet their needs around the food and drink they received. People were supported to access healthcare professionals and maintain their day to day health needs.

People were supported by a staff team who were kind and caring in their approach towards them. However, people did not feel the management team were caring in their approach. People were supported to make day to day choices about the care they received. People’s privacy, digity and independence were protected and promoted by care staff.

People were happy with the support care staff provided during their care visits. However, they said the time at which they received their care visits was a concern and did not always meet their needs. People were not always fully involved in the development of their care plan. People did not always feel their complaints were heard and responded to appropriately.

People did not know who the management of the service were and they did not always feel heard by the provider. Staff felt the provider and management team had been supportive. However, they felt the quality of the service and support they received was affected by the inconsistencies in the management of the service. The provider had developed quality assurance systems, however, they were not sufficient in identifying the concerns we found during our inspection. Quality assurance systems were inadequate and were not effective in identifying areas of risk and improvements needed.

We found the provider was not meeting the regulations around safeguarding people, the need for consent, the management of the service and their registration with CQC. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.

The overall rating for this service is ‘Inadequate’ and the service is therefore in ‘Special measures’. Services in special measures will be kept under review and, if we have not taken immediate action to propose to cancel the provider’s registration of the service, will be inspected again within six months. The expectation is that providers found to have been providing inadequate care should have made significant improvements within this timeframe.

If not enough improvement is made within this timeframe so that there is still a rating of inadequate for any key question or overall, we will take action in line with our enforcement procedures to begin the process of preventing the provider from operating this service. This will lead to cancelling their registration or to varying the terms of their registration within six months if they do not improve. This service will continue to be kept under review and, if needed, could be escalated to urgent enforcement action. Where necessary, another inspection will be conducted within a further six months, and if there is not enough improvement so there is still a rating of inadequate for any key question or overall, we will take action to prevent the provider from operating this service. This will lead to cancelling their registration or to varying the terms of their registration.

For adult social care services the maximum time for being in special measures will usually be no more than 12 months. If the service has demonstrated improvements when we inspect it and it is no longer rated as inadequate for any of the five key questions it will no longer be in special measures.