16 & 26 November 2015
During a routine inspection
This inspection took place on 16 November 2015 and was announced. 48 hours’ notice of the inspection was given because the service is small and the manager may be out of the office supporting staff or providing care. We needed to be sure that they would be available when the inspection took place. We returned to the service on 26 November 2015 as we required further information to complete our inspection.
Pinner Home Care is a domiciliary care agency that provides a range of care supports to adults living in their own homes. At the time of our inspection the service provided care and support to 30 people with a range of support needs including disability and age related conditions. We last inspected Pinner Home Care on 27 February 2013 when we found that the service met the regulations we assessed.
The service had a registered manager. 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.
The people that we spoke with were positive about the care workers and the quality of support that was provided by the service.
People were protected from the risk of abuse. The provider had taken reasonable steps to identify potential areas of concern and prevent abuse from happening. Staff members demonstrated that they understood how to safeguard the people whom they were supporting. Training and information about safeguarding was provided to staff.
However, the provider had failed to submit required regulatory notifications to CQC regarding safeguarding concerns that had been reported to us by the local authority safeguarding team during the past year.
The service had assessed any risks to people receiving care. Risk assessments were up to date and guidance for staff members in how to manage and minimise risk was contained within people’s care plans.
Information about people’s medicines was detailed and up-to-date. Guidance was included in people’s care plans to ensure that they were protected from any risk associated with administration of their medicines. However, accurate records of administration of medicines had not been maintained. New medicines administration records were being introduced to improve record keeping.
We have made a recommendation about medicine administration records.
The provider had ensured that people received support from good quality staff members at the times that they required. Staff recruitment processes were in place to ensure that workers employed by the service were suitable. Staffing rotas met the current support needs of people, and access to management support was available outside of office hours.
Staff members received training which met national standards for staff working in social care organisations. However, although staff members told us that they felt well supported by their manager, some had not received regular formal supervision by a manager, nor an annual appraisal.
The service had an up to date policy on the Mental Capacity Act 2005, and information about people’s capacity to make decisions was included in their care plans. There was recorded evidence that consent to care had been sought and obtained.
Information regarding people’s dietary needs was included in their care plans, and guidance for staff was provided in order to ensure that they met individual requirements.
Staff members spoke positively and respectfully about their approaches to care, and the people that they provided care to.
Care plans were up to date and contained information about people’s care needs and how these would be supported. People were positive about the information that they received from the service.
People who used the service knew what to do if they had a concern or complaint.
The service was generally well managed. Staff and family members spoke positively about the registered manager. A range of processes were in place to monitor the quality of the service, and we saw that actions were in place to improve these. However, the provider was not able to evidence how these quality assurance processes were evaluated and used to improve the service.
We found two breaches of The Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014 and one breach of The Care Quality Commission (Registration) Regulations 2009. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.