About the service:

Agincare UK Wolverhampton is a domiciliary care agency who are registered to offer support to; Children 0-18 years, Dementia, Learning disabilities or autistic spectrum disorder, Mental Health, Older People, Physical Disability, Sensory Impairment and Younger Adults.

It provides personal care to people living in their own homes. Not everyone using Agincare UK Wolverhampton received personal care. At the time of our inspection, 170 people were receiving personal care.

People’s experience of using this service:

Improvements were required to medicines management.

People’s Medicine administration record sheet did not contain enough information required to administer the medicines correctly.

Risk assessment were not personal to people.

Some people’s risk assessments and care plans had not been reviewed, however people told us they were fully involved when review occurred.

Care plans were not always person centred and did not always document people’s choices, however people told us they had regular staff who they knew well and that they were involved in the care planning process.

Not all staff had received training in nutrition or end of life care.

The registered manager completed audits however, these did not effectively pick up issues or identify actions needed. For example, when staff required refresher training.

People told us they felt safe with staff.

Staff had a good understanding of abuse and the actions they should take if they had any concerns that people were at risk.

The provider carried out safe recruitment processes.

Staff followed infection prevention and control procedures to protect people from infection.

People told us that staff were good and knew what to do. One person said, “Staff understand what I need and do it well.”

The provider supported people with their healthcare needs, including referring to services such as speech and language therapists, district nurses and GP’s as required.

Staff ensured people were involved in decisions about their care; and knew what they needed to do to make sure decisions were taken in people's best interests.

People told us that they had good relationships with staff, we were told that staff were ‘caring, kind and polite.’

The registered manager matched staff skills to meet people’s specific needs where they were able.

People received a weekly schedule to inform them of which staff would be visiting.

People were supported to maintain their independence, privacy and dignity.

People, relatives and staff all knew how to complain and who to talk to if they had any concerns.

People were protected against discrimination. There was a policy which covered the Equality Act 2010 and protected characteristics.

Most people we spoke to stated they would recommend the services of Agincare to other people.

The service met the characteristics for a rating of ‘requires improvement’’ in four of the five key questions we inspected and a rating of ‘good’ in one. Therefore, our overall rating for the service after this inspection was ‘requires improvement’.

More information is in the full report.

Rating at last inspection:

At the last inspection the service was rated Good. (Report published 28 September 2016)

Why we inspected:

This inspection was a planned inspection.

Enforcement:

At this inspection we found two breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. You can see what action we have told the registered provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.

Follow up:

Going forward we will continue to monitor this service and plan to inspect in line with our reinspection schedule for services rated Requires Improvement.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Our inspection took place on 13 and 20 July 2106 and was announced. This was the first inspection of the service at their current location.

Agincare Wolverhampton provides personal care to people with a range of needs in their own home. At the time of the inspection they were providing a personal care service to 67 people.

The registered manager had left their post shortly before the inspection, although a new manager had been recruited and has since applied to be the registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People felt safe with the staff visiting them. People said they received support in a way that ensured they were safe, and there were enough staff to ensure they always received care calls close to agreed times. Systems were in place to ensure risks to people were identified and minimised. People had confidence in the skills and knowledge of staff, and we saw systems were in place to ensure the right staff were employed by the provider. People received medicines in a safe way.

People had confidence in staff skills and knowledge. Staff understood what people’s needs and preferences were. People told us staff knew how to provide care so their needs were met. Staff promoted people’s rights, and knew how to obtain people’s consent before delivering care. People were supported with food and drink in accordance with their needs and preferences. People were supported to access healthcare professionals when required.

People had mixed views about having regular carers but everyone told us they still had positive relationships with all staff. People said the staff were caring, kind and respectful. People’s dignity and privacy was respected and they made choices about how their care was delivered. People’s independence was promoted.

People were involved in any changes to their care, and said when there was a change to their needs and preferences these were recognised and responded to by the provider. Staff were knowledgeable as to what people’s preferences were. People could complain and were confident any concerns would be resolved.

People thought the service was well led, and they were able to share their views. The provider had systems in place to ensure they captured and responded to people’s view and experiences. Systems were in place to monitor the quality of the service. Staff felt well supported by the provider.