Inchwater Home Care

Updated 10 September 2019

The inspection

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team

This inspection was carried out by one inspector.

Service and service type

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

The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. 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.

Notice of inspection

We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection. This was because we needed to be sure that the provider or registered manager would be in the office to support the inspection and arrange to speak to people on the telephone before we visited the office. Inspection activity started on 6 June 2019 and ended on 11 June 2019. We visited the office location on 10 June and the 11 June 2019.

What we did before the inspection

We used the information the provider sent us in the provider information return. This is information providers are required to send us with key information about their service, what they do well, and improvements they plan to make. This information helps support our inspections. We sought feedback from health and social care professionals who work with the service. We looked at the notifications and information we had received from the service. We used all of this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection

We spoke with three people who used the service and two relatives on the telephone. We also visited two people in their own home and spoke to one other relative during a visit. We received feedback from two health and social care professionals and one organisation which worked in partnership with the service. We spoke with the two providers during the inspection, one of whom was the also the registered manager. We also spoke to five other members of staff.

We reviewed a range of records. This included three people’s care records and medication records. We looked at one staff file in relation to recruitment. We looked at staff training, supervision and appraisal records. We also looked at a variety of records relating to the management of the service, including incidents, complaints and surveys.

After the inspection

We continued to seek clarification from the provider to validate evidence found.

Updated 10 September 2019

About the service

Inchwater Home Care is a domiciliary care agency providing personal care to people. At the time of the inspection the service was supporting 27 people with the regulated activity personal care. People using the service were mainly older people and people living with a long-term health conditions which affected their physical and mental wellbeing. Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also consider any wider social care provided.

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

People, their relatives, staff and health and social care professionals continued to be consistently positive about the service. People and their relatives said, “They have excellent rapport”, “A friend recommended them to me and I would recommend them to others”, “I am very, very happy. [My relative] is very well looked after.”, “The service is excellent, it is highly recommended.”, and “I can’t speak too highly of them.”

The providers continued to promote a high-quality caring service delivered by staff who worked in line with their values. This was supported by an in-depth recruitment process which focused on recruiting staff who were kind and compassionate. Staff and people were matched based on people’s preferences, interests and personalities and there were strong bonds between people and staff built on trust. This meant people were comfortable speaking to staff if they had any concerns or worries about their health or safety.

People continued to be supported by highly skilled and well-motivated staff. One staff said, “I wouldn’t switch jobs for the world.” This meant people had the confidence they needed in staff to support them well. People were provided with support to continue managing their own medicines where appropriate and medicines were managed safely. When things did go wrong the providers were open and honest and focused on learning rather than blame. This meant staff could reduce the risk of events re-occurring

The staff and providers worked in close partnership with other organisations to promote people’s health and wellbeing. This support was extended to relatives as staff understood the importance of family carers in the lives of people who used the service.

People continued to have excellent levels of support with eating and drinking. Staff used innovative approaches to encourage people to eat well and people had improved their health and wellbeing through eating better.

There was a strong focus on encouraging people to maintain or regain their independence which had achieved positive outcomes for people. People were treated with respect and were supported to lead dignified lives. Staff regularly went to extra mile and were proactively kind to people and their relatives. Relatives were also treated with kindness and told us they found the service provided them with support they found invaluable and led to better outcomes for people.

The providers had continued to be passionate about high standards of care and had continued to drive forward improvements. The provider helped to develop best practice and share this learning internally and with the wider community. The values of the service were understood by staff who actively followed them. This led to a positive culture, a strong commitment to quality and improved outcomes for people. T

he provider was proactive at encouraging people to feedback about their experiences of the service. People were well supported to express themselves and be involved in planning their own care. Care plans were frequently reviewed with people. Where there were complaints these had been addressed. The providers fully analysed trends in complaints and had used this to identify and address the root causes of any discontent to improve the service.

People told us they felt safe and were supported and to continue or re-engage in the activities or sports they had enjoyed throughout their lives. This had a positive impact of people’s wellbeing.

There was a focus on the individual and promoting well-being and positive mental health. Care, including the care at the end of people’s lives was person centred and based on the preferences of the person. 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.

Staff enabled people to have control of their care and lead active lives. This started at the assessment stage where assessments concentrated on people’s strengths and led to care plans focused on wellbeing and encouraging independence.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was Outstanding (published on 17 November 2016).

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.