Updated 17 March 2020
We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.
Inspection team
The inspection was carried out by an inspector and an assistant inspector.
Service and service type
Cambridge Care Company is a domiciliary care agency providing personal care to 48 people living in their own homes.
The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. They were also the provider’s nominated individual. This meant they were legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.
Notice of inspection
This inspection was announced.
We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection. This was because we needed to be sure that the provider or a member of their management team would be in the office to support the inspection.
Inspection activity started on 5 February 2020 and ended on 18 February 2020 when we gave feedback. It included a visit to the office location on 5 February 2020 to meet with the registered manager. We also spoke with a care coordinator, dementia trainer, member of staff from human resources and three care staff.
What we did before the inspection
We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. We sought feedback from the local authority and professionals who worked with the service. The provider was not asked to complete a provider information return prior to this inspection. This is information we require providers to send us to give some key information about their service, what the service does well, and improvements they plan to make. We took this into account when we inspected the service and made the judgements in this report.
During the inspection
We reviewed a range of records. This included six people’s care records. We looked at four staff files in relation to recruitment and staff supervision. We also looked at a variety of records relating to the management of the service, including policies and procedures.
We carried out telephone interviews with people who used the service, relatives and staff on 6, 7 and 10 February 2020. We spoke with nine people who used the service and one relative about their experience of the care provided and received electronic feedback from one professional.
After the inspection
We continued to seek clarification from the provider to validate evidence found. We looked at training data and quality assurance records.