Care at Home Services (South East) Limited – Tonbridge, Tunbridge Wells and South West Kent

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.

The service was supporting 184 people at the time of our inspection, 163 of whom received personal care.

People felt safe when staff provided their care. People told us they received a reliable service from staff who knew how to provide their care in a safe way.

Staff understood their responsibilities in protecting people from abuse and knew how to report any concerns they had. The provider's recruitment procedures helped ensure only suitable staff were employed.

Risk assessments had been carried out to identify and minimise any risks involved in people's care. People's medicines were managed safely. If medicines errors occurred, staff sought and followed medical advice. Staff helped keep people's homes clean and wore personal protective equipment (PPE) when they carried out their visits.

Staff had an induction when they started work and had access to the training they needed to carry out their roles. Records showed that some refresher training was overdue. The registered manager assured us they would take action to ensure staff attended the necessary refresher training.

People's needs were assessed before they began to use the service. People told us their wishes and preferences about their care were listened to and incorporated into their care plans. Care plans were reviewed regularly to ensure they continued to reflect people's needs.

Staff monitored people's health effectively and responded promptly if people became unwell. Staff worked well with other professionals involved in people's care to ensure they received the support they needed.

People received their care from consistent staff and had established positive relationships with their care workers. People said staff knew their preferences about their care and respected their choices. Staff

supported people to maintain their independence where this was important to them.

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.

People told us they felt able to raise concerns when they were dissatisfied. People who had complained in the past said the agency had responded to and resolved their concerns.

People had opportunities to give feedback about the care they received and their views were listened to. This included regular telephone and face-to-face reviews and an annual survey. The agency's quality monitoring systems enabled the office/management team to maintain an effective oversight of the service. The registered manager sent us an action plan setting out how improvements would be made in medicines management, staff training and communication.