Bexley Home Care

What inspectors found

From the Care Quality Commission's assessment published 9 October 2024 (assessment visit 11 July 2024). Quoted under the Open Government Licence.

1. Safe

   –No rating No rating

   We identified two breaches of the legal regulations. Risks to people's safety were not always assessed and identified. Risk assessments did not have clear guidance for staff on how to keep people safe, prevent or mitigate risks where identified. Staff were not always aware of people’s needs and associated risks to help maintain people’s safety. Staff had not received appropriate training in relation to some people’s specific needs. Staff were not effectively deployed as the provider did not have an effective system to monitor care calls and staff timekeeping for lateness and missed calls. The service did carry out appropriate recruitment checks, however, application forms had gaps in education and employment histories that had not been accounted for. People told us they felt safe using the service and that there were enough staff. Processes were in place to protect people from abuse. Staff told us they felt supported by the service.

2. Effective

   GGood Good

   People’s individual care needs were assessed to ensure that they could be met before they joined the service. The service was working within the principles of the MCA. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff assisted them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service upheld this practice. Staff had a good understanding of the MCA and the management and staff team ensured people were supported to consent and make choices about their support as far as possible. However, people and their relatives had not always completed ‘care to consent’ forms.

3. Caring

   GGood Good

   People were supported to have choice and control over their care. Staff promoted independence while supporting people. Overall communication with people was effective.

4. Responsive

   –No rating No rating

   We identified one breach of the legal regulations. People were not always supported in a person-centred way in relation to their health and care needs. Staff were not always aware of people’s health conditions. People’s wishes and preferences were not always respected. The way people communicated was not always clearly documented. People and their relatives were not always involved in reviewing their care.

5. Well-led

   –No rating No rating

   We identified one breach of the legal regulations. The registered manager was on leave at the time of the inspection, the service was currently being managed by two directors, and a field supervisor. Monitoring systems in place did not always ensure that there was effective oversight of the service to assess and monitor the care provided. Audits were not always undertaken. Records were not always in place to demonstrate that feedback from people was acted upon. The provider was supporting people with learning disabilities, mental health conditions and substances misuse problems. However, the provider had not registered with CQC to support people within these service user bands. Staff told us they supported by management and felt confident about speaking up at work.