Archived: Homecare For You Oldham

Updated 10 May 2016

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 28 and 29 January and we returned on 1 February 2016. We contacted the Registered Manager 48 hours before our visit to advise them of our plans to carry out a comprehensive inspection of the service. This was to ensure that the Register Manager and any relevant staff would be available to answer our questions during the inspection process.

The inspection was carried out by two adult social care inspectors.

Before our inspection, we reviewed the Provider Information Return (PIR). The PIR is a document that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We also reviewed information we held about the service and information we had received about the service from people who contacted us. We contacted the Quality Monitoring Team from Oldham Council to obtain their views about the care provided. The Quality Monitoring Team work with providers to ensure that they are meeting their contractual obligations with the Council. They told us they had no concerns with the provider.

We reviewed a range of records about people’s care and how the service was managed. This included five people’s plans of care and associated documents including risk assessments. We looked at ten staff personnel files including their recruitment and training records. We also looked at documentation about the service that was given to staff and people using the service and policies and procedures that the provider had in place. We spoke with the registered manager and eleven care workers, a coordinator and the training manager.

We visited five people who used the service in their home environment. We also telephoned and spoke with two people who used the service and two relatives of people who used the service. This was to gain their views about the service they received.

Updated 10 May 2016

We undertook an announced inspection of Homecare for You Oldham on the 28 and 29 January 2016 and we returned on the 1 February 2016. The inspection was announced 48 hours prior to our visit to ensure that the registered manager or other responsible person would be available to assist with the inspection process.

Homecare for You Oldham provides personal care and support to adults living in their own homes such as social inclusion, shopping and laundry services. At the time of inspection there were 55 people using the service. 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.

We found four breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the report.

People told us that they did not always feel safe when staff supported them. They told us that this depended upon which staff member was supporting them.

People did not receive their medicines safely. Records did not contain important information about the medicines that people were taking and care plans did not show what support people needed with their medicines. This meant that there was a risk that people might not receive the medicines they needed as prescribed by their doctor and there had been occasions when this had happened.

Initial assessments of people’s needs carried out by the local authority detailed information about their care requirements, however this information had not always been transferred when care records had been developed using Homecare for You care plans. This meant there was a risk people might not receive effective care. People’s concerns were not being recognised as complaints and were not investigated appropriately.

Risk assessments were in place which set out how to support people in a safe manner in areas such as moving and handling, nutrition and health and safety however we saw no risk assessments identifying hazards in the environment such as working in people’s home or when out in the community.

The service had safeguarding and whistleblowing procedures in place. Staff were aware of their responsibilities in these areas.

Staff told us that they sought people’s consent prior to providing their care. Where people were assessed not to have the capacity to consent to their care and treatment there was a record of how the care provided had been agreed as required by the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

Care workers were supported through training to help them meet the care needs of people they supported appropriately. They undertook an induction programme when they started work at the service.

People told us that some staff were caring but new staff needed to be more caring and compassionate in their work. Staff we spoke with had a good understanding of how to promote people’s dignity however one person told us she needed to remind care staff to ensure dignity was maintained during personal care support.

When people started to use the service a care plan was developed that included details about their care needs and how to meet those needs. Information about peoples likes dislikes and preferences, were included so staff had all of the relevant information to assist them when supporting the person. However the care plans we reviewed were basic and lacked detail of information about the person’s needs.

People felt that they were sometimes rushed by care staff. They told us that the care staff did not always communicate with them and spent time talking to each other using their own language which was not always English.

People told us that they completed a questionnaire to provide feedback on the service. However feedback from this questionnaire was not delivered to care staff or people using the service, or used for the development of the service.

Systems were in place for monitoring the quality of care and support provided. These had not been updated regularly and did not reflect all of the checks that had taken place.

The service had a management structure in place. Some staff told us that they found the management approachable and felt that they were listened to however some care staff and office staff found the manager unapproachable.