Updated 29 March 2019
We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) 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 Act, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.
There was a service manager in post however they were not registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that the provider is legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided. However, the service manager was planning to submit their application to register with CQC.
Inspection team: One inspector carried out this inspection.
Service and service type:
Luton Borough Council Reablement Service provides support over a six-week period to enable people to regain their independence. This service is a domiciliary (home care) care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats.
Notice of inspection:
This inspection was announced. Inspection activity started on 4 March 2019 and ended on 7 March 2019. We visited the service on 5 March 2019 to meet the service manager and staff and to review care records and other documents.
What we did:
Before the inspection we considered all the information we held in relation to the service, including statutory notifications. This included the Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that requires them to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. This information helps support our inspections. We also requested people and their relatives contact details, so we could talk with them about the service they received.
During the inspection:
• We spoke to one care coordinator and a senior coordinator and the service manager.
• We reviewed information from three care files which included all aspects of care and risk assessments. which included medicine records.
• We looked at staff support arrangements including supervisions, and training records.
• Records of accidents, incidents, complaints and audits.
Following the inspection:
We reviewed information we requested such as training documents. After the office inspection we visited two people’s homes to talk with them and staff who provided their support. Overall, we spoke with seven people, two relatives and six staff.