Home Instead Central Hemel Hempstead & Chilterns

We completed this announced assessment due to the length of time passed since our last inspection. The last rating for this service was Good (published 03 January 2018), following this assessment the rating remains Good. We looked at all quality statements under the 5 key questions.

At the time of this assessment, there were 105 people using the service. 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.

We assessed the service against ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ guidance to make judgements about whether the provider guaranteed people with a learning disability and autistic people respect, equality, dignity, choices, independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. At the time of the assessment, the service was supporting people with a learning disability, however none of the people were receiving personal care. The provider had regard to ‘Right support, right care, right culture.’

People, relatives and staff offered positive feedback about their experiences of the service. People’s care preferences were known, and their support was tailored to their individual needs as individuals. Robust assessments and reviews were completed, and people and their relative’s input was reflected throughout care records.

The provider used quality audits and surveys to have oversight of the service. People, relatives and staff knew how to give feedback and confirmed they were provided with frequent opportunities to do so.

People received care from sufficient staff, who knew them well and who provided timely care visits. Systems were in place to ensure staff were appropriately recruited, trained and supported.

Staff delivered personalised care and support based on people’s assessed needs and preferences. Risks to people’s health, safety and wellbeing were effectively managed. Information regarding changes in people’s needs, incident and accidents, and any feedback following events was shared via consistent communication.

We received positive feedback about the registered manager and senior staff, with staff describing them as approachable and supportive. The registered manager was responsive to feedback during the assessment and demonstrated a positive approach to learning.