Q Care Assist

Updated 21 April 2023

The inspection

We carried out this performance review and assessment under Section 46 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act). We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements of the regulations associated with the Act and looked at the quality of the service to provide a rating.

Unlike our standard approach to assessing performance, we did not physically visit the office of the location. This is a new approach we have introduced to reviewing and assessing performance of some care at home providers. Instead of visiting the office location we use technology such as electronic file sharing and video or phone calls to engage with people using the service and staff.

Inspection team

The inspection was carried out by 1 inspector and 2 Expert’s 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.

Service and service type

This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats.

This service is required to have a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

At the time of our inspection there was a registered manager in post.

Notice of inspection

We gave the service a week’s notice of the inspection. This was because it is a small service and we needed to be sure that a member of staff would be available to support the inspection.

What we did before the inspection

The provider was not asked to complete a Provider Information Return (PIR) prior to this inspection. A PIR is information providers send us to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

We reviewed a range of the provider’s audits and governance documents. We spoke with 5 people and 14 relatives on 24 February 2023.

We used all of this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection

Inspection activity started on 24 February 2023 and ended on 13 March 2023. We had a virtual meeting with the registered manager, nominated individual and care coordinator manager on 1 March 2023. The nominated individual is responsible for supervising the management of the service on behalf of the provider.

We reviewed the information they sent us between 6 March and 10 March 2023. We made phone calls to staff on 9 and 10 March 2023.

This was an ‘inspection using remote technology’. This means we did not visit the office location and instead used technology such as electronic file sharing to gather information, and video and phone calls to engage with people using the service as part of this performance review and assessment.

Updated 21 April 2023

About the service

Q Care Assist is a domiciliary care agency. The service provides personal care to older and younger adults who may have physical disabilities and be living with dementia. At the time of our inspection there were 56 people using the service and 42 of those people received personal care.

Not everyone who used the service received personal care. In this service, the Care Quality Commission can only inspect the service received by people who get support with personal care. This includes help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where people receive such support, we also consider any wider social care provided.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

Whilst the provider had taken action and investigated incidents, one incident had not been referred to the local authority safeguarding team.

Not all statutory notifications had been submitted in a timely manner and not all the provider’s policies and procedures had been fully followed for recruitment processes and safeguarding.

Care plans and risk assessments were in place to guide staff however some were not consistent in the level of detail they provided to staff. Care staff had sometimes applied skin creams to people when these were not listed on the provider’s medicines administration record (MAR) charts. Staff were checked to ensure they were suitable to work in care. However, not all required checks had been recorded by the provider to show they had been thoroughly completed.

There were enough staff to meet people’s needs and people received care from consistent staff who knew them well. The provider took action to learn lessons when things had gone wrong and to implement improvements. Infection prevention and control measures were followed to help promote people’s safety.

People’s needs were assessed, and their equality and diversity needs considered. Care staff were provided with training and supported to gain the experience needed to meet people’s care needs effectively. People were supported with their nutrition and hydration by staff that encouraged them to eat and drink well. People were supported to live healthier lives as care staff worked with other agencies to ensure they received effective care and support.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

Care was provided in ways that maintained people’s dignity and promoted their independence. People felt well cared for and respected. People’s equality and diversity needs were understood and respected. People told us staff were kind and patient. People felt able to express their views and opinions and felt listened to.

People received responsive care that was culturally relevant to them. People’s care preferences were known and respected. Staff knew people well and had built positive relationships with people. People were supported to maintain their important relationships and community connections. People’s communication needs were understood and met. People had been provided with information on the provider’s complaints process.

People felt asked for their views and listened to. The provider had clear aims to provide good quality person centred care. They used relevant research to inform their service delivery and used partnership working to promote good care outcomes for people. The management team were well known to people and their relatives and care staff felt supported. The provider looked for opportunities to continuously learn and improve care.

For more information, please read the detailed findings section of this report. If you are reading this as a separate summary, the full report can be found on the Care Quality Commission (CQC) website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection:

We registered this service on 5 October 2021 and this was the first inspection.

Why we inspected

This inspection was prompted by a review of the information we held about this service.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.

This was an ‘inspection using remote technology’. This means we did not visit the office location and instead used technology such as electronic file sharing to gather information, and video and phone calls to engage with people using the service as part of this performance review and assessment.