Independent People Homecare

We reviewed 5 quality statements under this key question: learning culture, safeguarding, involving people to manage risks, safe and effective staffing, and medicines optimisation. At our last inspection, the provider had failed to robustly assess the risks relating to the health safety and welfare of people. Medicines were not managed safely and there was a lack of evidence of embedding change or learning lessons when things went wrong. Systems and processes in place were not robust enough to demonstrate people were protected from the risk of harm, potential abuse or neglect. At this assessment we found the provider had made enough improvement and was no longer in breach of regulation.

During this assessment we found risks to people’s safety were assessed and acted on. There was an open and transparent culture in relation to accidents and incidents and they were used as opportunities to learn and lessen risks. Any changes in practice or policy were shared with staff and used to drive improvement in the service. Staff had been recruited safely and there were enough suitably trained staff to meet people’s care and support needs. Medicines were managed safely. People’s medicines were managed and administered by trained staff whose competencies were regularly reviewed.

We reviewed 4 quality statements under this key question: assessing needs, delivering evidence-based care and treatment, supporting people to live healthier lives and consent to care and treatment. Prior to receiving care people were assessed to ensure the service could meet their needs. People’s needs were assessed, and their choices recorded. Care plans were holistic taking into consideration people’s physical, social and cultural needs. Daily notes demonstrated the care provided reflected people’s expressed wishes. People and those close to them were involved in the planning and deciding how they received their care, Systems were in place to ensure care plans were regularly reviewed. The service was proactive in its response to concerns or complaints and people and relatives were given the opportunity to feedback their experiences.

We reviewed 3 quality statements under this key question: kindness, compassion and dignity, independence, choice and control and responding to people’s immediate needs. People and their relatives described staff as ‘kind’ and ‘caring. Staff knew people well and were committed to ensuring people received good care. Staff supported people with dignity and respect and responded to their individual needs. People were given choice and control over the care and support they received.

We reviewed 4 quality statements under this key question: person centred care, providing information, listening to and involving people and equity in experience and outcomes. The values of the service placed people at the centre of its decision making. As a result, people received personalised care and support, tailored to their needs. Information was provided in the format chosen by the person. The views of people using the service were sought, and actions taken to make improvements.

We reviewed 4 quality statements under this key question; shared direction and culture; capable, compassionate, and inclusive leaders, governance, management, sustainability, and partnerships, and communities. At our last inspection, the provider was in breach of the regulations because they did not have an effective quality assurance system in place to identify and rectify issues and drive service improvement. At this assessment we found the provider had made enough improvement and was no longer in breach of regulation. Systems and processes were in place to drive improvements. Audits were robust which ensured people received safe care and treatment and the service achieved good outcomes for people. Staff were clear about their responsibilities and roles and felt supported by the registered manager and senior management team. Staff spoke positively about the leadership and culture of the service and felt valued in their roles. The registered manager and senior team were available and approachable to staff, people and their relatives. The service worked collaboratively with a range of external healthcare professionals to ensure people received appropriate support when required.