Amazing Angels Homecare

This announced inspection took place on 9 November 2018.

At out last inspection, the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

People were supported by sufficient, skilled staff to meet their needs and robust recruitment processes were in place to ensure only suitable staff were employed. Staff received on-going training, induction and supervision to support them in their roles. Staff were aware of their responsibilities in safeguarding people from abuse. Risks to people’s safety were identified and control measures implemented to keep people safe. People received their medicines safely and in line with prescription guidelines.

People were supported to have choice and staff considered the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 when assessing people’s capacity to receive care.

People told us staff treated them with kindness, showed them respect and enabled them to make choices about their care. People were cared for by a sufficient number of staff. Staff said they had access to personal protective equipment to help avoid the transfer of infections.

The agency worked with professionals to ensure that people’s healthcare needs were met. People had access to the food of their choosing. People’s care records contained good information in relation to their care needs. Care plans were regularly reviewed and updated to ensure staff had up to date guidance regarding people’s care. Where people had complained about the service, their complaint was fully investigated and responded to.

We received positive feedback about the management of the agency and staff told us they enjoyed working for Amazing Angels and felt valued. Systems were in place to monitor the quality of service the agency provided and to ensure continuous development. The service worked proactively with other agencies. Where significant incidents or safeguarding concerns had arisen, the registered manager had notified CQC.

The agency 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 registered manager assisted us with our inspection.

Risks to people’s safety had been assessed and people’s premises were risk assessed to help ensure people were safe within their own home. People were kept safe because staff understood their responsibilities should they suspect abuse was taking place. People told us they felt safe in the hands of the staff they received the care from. People received the medicines they had been prescribed and medicines auditing took place to ensure staff were following good medicines management procedures.

Staff had a good understanding of the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). People were asked for their consent before they received care and staff told us the always encouraged people to make their own decisions.

People received information on how to make a complaint should they need to. People told us they would be happy to discuss any concerns they may have with the agency. The agency had a contingency plan in place which would be used in the event of an emergency. People had access to contact details should they need to contact the agency outside of normal working hours.

There were enough staff to meet people’s needs. People told us staff, on the whole, turned up on time and always stayed the full time they needed them. The provider’s recruitment procedures helped ensure that only suitable staff were employed to work for the agency.

People received their care from staff who were supported through supervision and had access to relevant, on-going training. Staff felt supported by management and said they could approach them with any queries they had. Regular staff meetings were held which staff told us they found very useful.

People were supported to access healthcare professionals when they needed to. Although people were not provided with meals cooked from scratch by staff, people confirmed when staff prepared their breakfast or snacks they were always asked what they would like.

People’s needs were assessed before they received care from the agency. This was to ensure the agency could meet the person’s needs. People told us staff were kind and caring. They said staff treated people with respect. People’s care records were written in a person-centred way and included information about people’s background and personal preferences. Staff escorted people to their activities when they wished them to.

The provider had a system of quality monitoring, which helped ensure that all areas of the agency were working well. People and relatives were invited to give their feedback and comments made were listened to and acted upon by staff.

At the time of our visit, the service provided care to 34 people. As part of our inspection we spoke to seven people who used the service, two relatives, six members of staff and the registered manager. Everyone that we spoke with was happy with the care provided. One person told us, 'If I could mark them out of 100, I'd give them 130!'

We considered our inspection findings to answer questions we always ask:

Is the service safe?

Is the service effective?

Is the service caring?

Is the service responsive?

Is the service well-led?

Is the service safe?

All of the people we spoke with told us they felt safe in the hands of the carers. One person said, 'I feel a lot safer than I did with my last care agency.'

We saw that the recruitment practice was safe and thorough, which ensured that only staff suitable to work with vulnerable people were employed by the service.

Is the service effective?

We saw that people's care plans were regularly reviewed which ensured they remained up to date in order to reflect a person's needs. Both the people who used the service and their relatives told us that staff had a good understanding of their needs. One person said, 'They understand what I need.'

Is the service caring?

People that we spoke with told us that the staff were very caring. One person who used the service who had felt unwell told us, 'They (staff) were very concerned about me.' Another person said, 'The carer called the doctor for me today because my arm was swollen.'

Is the service responsive?

We saw that where people's needs had changed, or their health deteriorated, staff responded by involving an appropriate health care professional.

Is the service well-led?

The provider had systems in place for monitoring the quality of the service. We saw that the provider had recently carried out a satisfaction survey in order to gain the views from people with regards to the quality of the care and support they received.

We were told by the manger that all the people who used the service would have their needs fully assessed by a senior staff member of the agency prior to any care or assistance being offered to the person. Care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that ensured people's safety and welfare was maintained at all times that the staff were providing care.

In order to protect the people who used the agency the registered provider had developed a set of policies and procedures in relation to safeguarding vulnerable people. The policy and procedures were developed using good practices guidelines and made reference to Surrey County Councils (SCC) and Croydon Council's safeguarding vulnerable people's guidance.

We spoke to members of staff who all stated that they had received appropriate supervision and support from the manager and senior staff from the agency. One person told us that they had "not worked very long with the agency but during their induction the manager was very supportive and helped them work through their induction training log".

The agency undertook regular formal Quality Assurance (QA). The agency had developed QA questionnaires which was sent out to the people who used the service to gage the quality of support and to request feedback.