People in Action Domiciliary Care – North Warwickshire and Coventry received a Good rating across all five key questions at its announced inspection in September–October 2016. Minor shortfalls were noted around inconsistent involvement of people and relatives in care plan reviews and a low satisfaction questionnaire return rate, but no regulatory breaches were identified.
Concerns (5)
minor
Care planning
: “A person we spoke with confirmed knowledge of a support plan but commented. "I've not seen it and they don't tell me about it".”
minorCommunication with families: “Half of the relatives we spoke with also made reference to the lack of regular involvement with the support plans.”
minorRecord keeping: “The process although flexible to the needs of the people was a manual system which created additional work for service managers and potential delays.”
minorGovernance: “We reviewed the responses received from the last questionnaires issued and identified that there had been a low percentage returned.”
minorStaff competency: “One relative referred to some support workers lack of knowledge of the care and support needed by their relative on that day said "they're supposed to look in the diary but they don't seem to bother".”
Strengths
· People felt safe and comfortable with support workers; safeguarding procedures well understood and applied.
· Robust medication management with MAR sheet monitoring, competency checks, and PRN protocols in place.
· Thorough pre-employment checks including DBS and references completed before staff commence work.
· Effective staff induction including Care Certificate, regular supervision every three months, and up-to-date training records.
· Mental Capacity Act training undertaken by all staff with appropriate assessments and best interest decisions documented.
People in Action Domiciliary Care – North Warwickshire and Coventry achieved a Good rating across all five key questions at its May 2019 inspection, maintaining its previous Good rating from 2016. The sole area of concern was inconsistent recording of mental capacity assessments and consent, which the provider was already actively addressing through updated training and revised care record formats.
Concerns (2)
moderateConsent / capacity: “the provider did not ensure people's records consistently recorded their consent to their agreed care packages, where they had the capacity to do so.”
minorRecord keeping: “risk mitigation plans around falls could be clearer, to instruct staff on how they could take action to mitigate the risks of people falling.”
Strengths
· People felt safe with staff in their own homes and safeguarding training was comprehensive and up to date.
· Medicines were administered safely by trained and competent staff with regular competency assessments.
· Person-centred care was delivered with accessible information formats including easy read and picture formats.
· Staff received thorough induction based on Skills for Care standards, ongoing refresher training, and NVQ support.
· Robust quality auditing including medicines, infection control, health and safety with action plans overseen by management.
Quality-Statement breakdown (20)
safe: Systems and processes to safeguard people from the risk of abuseGood
safe: Assessing risk, safety monitoring and managementGood
safe: Staffing and recruitmentGood
safe: Using medicines safelyGood
safe: Preventing and controlling infectionGood
safe: Learning lessons when things go wrongGood
effective: Ensuring consent to care and treatment in line with law and guidanceGood
effective: Staff support: induction, training, skills and experienceGood