Comfort Call Tameside

Updated 17 October 2018

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.

The inspection was prompted in part by notification of an incident following which a person using the service died. This incident was subject to a coroner’s inquest. The information shared with CQC about the incident indicated potential concerns about the management of risk when supporting people with eating and drinking and the management of call times. This inspection examined those risks as part of a comprehensive inspection.

This inspection took place on 12 and 14 September 2018 and was announced. We gave the service 48 hours' notice of the inspection visit because we needed to be sure that a manager would be available. We visited the office location to review care records, policies and procedures. The inspection team comprised of one adult social care inspector.

Prior to the inspection we reviewed information we held about the service and provider, including notifications the provider had sent us. Notifications are information about important events which the provider is required to send us by law. We also asked the local authority and other commissioners of care and Healthwatch for their views on the service. Healthwatch is an independent organisation which collects people’s views about health and social care services. Commissioners of services shared some information of instances of poor communication from the service and staff not wearing the appropriate clothing to ensure good infection control practice. Healthwatch had received both positive and negative feedback in relation to comfort call. The negative feedback identified areas of concern in relation to the timing of calls and length of time staff stayed. This information helped in planning the inspection.

During this inspection we had telephone discussions with seven people who used the service and two relatives about their views of the service and the quality of the support they received. In addition, we spoke with the registered manager, the regional manager, one care coordinator and eight care staff.

We looked at seven people's care records, a range of documents relating to how the service was managed including medication records, five staff personnel files, staff training records, duty rotas, policies and procedures and quality assurance audits.

Updated 17 October 2018

The inspection tool place on the 12 and 14 September and was announced. We gave the service 48 hours' notice of the inspection visit because we needed to be sure that a manager would be available.

This service is a domiciliary care agency, providing personal care to people living in their own houses and flats in the community. It provides a service to older adults and younger adults who may have additional needs including physical and learning disabilities and sensory impairments.

Not everyone using Comfort Call receives regulated activity; CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also take into account any wider social care provided. At the time of the inspection the service was supporting 167 people with personal care.

The service had a registered manager in place. 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 we spoke with were happy with the service they received. They told us “they’ve been very good” and “I’ve always been very pleased, I have no complaints.”

There was a safe system of recruitment in place which helped protect people who used the service from unsuitable staff. Staff received training, supervision and appraisals. This meant that staff were supported to undertake their job roles effectively.

Medicines were managed safely and people received their medicines as prescribed.

Staff were aware of how to protect people from harm. Risks to people who used the service and staff were assessed. Guidance was given to staff on how to minimise those risks.

Suitable arrangements were in place to help ensure people's health and nutritional needs were met. Staff were aware of infection control procedures and had access to appropriate equipment.

Care records were person-centred and included people’s interests and preferences. Care and support provided were reviewed regularly with people, and those important to them, were also involved in these reviews.

People were consulted about the care provided and staff always sought their consent before providing support. The requirements of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 were being met.

People told us staff were nice and caring. Staff knew people well and were positive about the role of supporting people. Staff we spoke with understood the importance of maintaining and promoting people's independence and choice.

Accidents, incidents, safeguarding concerns and complaints were investigated fully and action taken to reduce the risk of reoccurrence. This learning was shared throughout the provider’s other locations.

Systems were in place to allow the registered manager to have a good overview of the quality of care being delivered.