Home Instead Senior Care (Nottingham) was rated Good overall following a remote assessment on 29 December 2023, with only Safe and Well-led evaluated. The service demonstrated consistent, person-centred care, safe medicines management with effective lesson-learning, strong staff support structures, and an open, transparent leadership culture.
Strengths
· People reported feeling safe with consistent staff who knew them well and communicated proactively about changes or running late.
· Robust staff recruitment with DBS and background checks, regular training, competency checks, and supervisions in place.
· Medicines administered safely with competency checks; a medicine error was identified, reviewed, and lessons shared with all staff.
· Effective infection prevention and control including appropriate use of PPE.
· Person-centred care plans regularly updated, identifying risks with clear guidance for staff on risk mitigation.
Quality-Statement breakdown (10)
safe: Systems and processes to safeguard people from the risk of abuse
Good
safe: Assessing risk, safety monitoring and managementGood
safe: Staffing and recruitmentGood
safe: Using medicines safely; Learning lessons when things go wrongGood
safe: Preventing and controlling infectionGood
well-led: Promoting a positive culture that is person-centred, open, inclusive and empoweringGood
well-led: Duty of candour; Continuous learning and improving careGood
well-led: Managers and staff being clear about their roles, and understanding quality performance, risks and regulatory requirementsGood
well-led: Engaging and involving people using the service, the public and staffGood
Home Instead Senior Care (Beeston, Nottingham) maintained its 'Good' rating across all five key questions at this February 2018 inspection, with 44 people receiving personal care. Minor issues were identified around inconsistent return of medication administration records, a small number of gaps in staff training, care records requiring review, and a few instances where formal MCA assessments had not been completed, all of which the registered manager committed to address promptly.
Concerns (4)
minorMedication management: “there was an inconsistent approach of staff in sending MAR back the provider's office once they had been completed. This needs to be done regularly to ensure they can be checked and errors addressed.”
minorConsent / capacity: “We did identify a small number of examples where a formal MCA assessment may have been needed to ensure all people's rights were protected.”
minorRecord keeping: “We did note some of the care records did require a review to ensure that they were fully reflective of people's current needs.”
minorStaff training: “We did note that there were a small number of gaps in the training for some staff. After the inspection, the registered manager assured us this was in the process of being addressed.”
Strengths
· All people and relatives felt safe when staff supported them in their homes.
· Staff always arrived on time and stayed for the agreed length of each call, with the office calling ahead on the rare occasion of lateness.
· Robust recruitment checks including criminal record checks were in place for all staff.
· Minimum one-hour calls enabled staff to build positive, meaningful relationships with people.
· People praised staff as kind, compassionate, caring, dignified and respectful.
Home Instead Senior Care (Beeston) received a Good rating across all five key questions at its January 2016 inspection, with 54 people receiving personal care. The service demonstrated strong person-centred practice, effective governance, and a caring culture, with only minor issues around supervision frequency and record-keeping consistency, both of which had been identified and addressed by management.
Concerns (3)
minorSupervision / appraisal: “The registered manager acknowledged that, due to staffing issues, staff had not all received the desired amount of supervision meetings in the past year.”
minorRecord keeping: “It had been identified that staff were not always signing records and also using an incorrect ink colour.”
minorCommunication with families: “Three people told us that they had experienced some difficulties regarding communication and incorrect invoices and did not always receive the response they wanted.”
Strengths
· People consistently reported feeling safe, with no missed calls and good staff punctuality evidenced by automated monitoring systems.
· Minimum one-hour care calls allowed staff time to build genuine relationships and avoid rushing people.
· Staff received a wide range of training relevant to their role, refreshed at regular intervals, with a thorough induction including shadowing.
· People and relatives were fully involved in creating and reviewing care plans, with copies held in the home.
· Effective quality monitoring systems including daily care record audits, satisfaction surveys, and regular phone check-ins.