Everycare (Central Hants) is a domiciliary care provider and also provides a 24-hour live-in care service. At the time of this inspection 44 people received personal care support from the service. The service supported older people, some of who were living with dementia and people with physical disabilities, within their own homes.

Not everyone using the service received a regulated activity; CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also take into account any wider social care provided.

The inspection took place on 11 and 12 February 2019 and was announced.

At our last inspection on 14 December 2016 we rated the service Good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of Good. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

The service had a registered manager in post. 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.

Staff understood their role and responsibilities to keep people safe from harm. Staff had received training to deliver care safely and to an appropriate standard.

Staff had a good knowledge of the provider’s whistleblowing policy and procedures which meant they were able to raise concerns to protect people from unsafe care.

People were supported by staff who promoted their independence, respected their dignity and maintained their privacy.

Care plans reflected people's individual needs and preferences and were regularly reviewed to ensure the provider continued to meet people's needs.

Risks to people had been assessed and reviewed regularly to ensure people’s individual needs were being met safely.

Recruitment processes were robust to make sure people were cared for by suitable staff. There were sufficient numbers of staff deployed to meet people’s needs.

Staff understood the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and their responsibilities to ensure that people who were unable to make their own decisions about their care and support were protected.

There was an effective complaints system in place. People told us they were confident to raise any issues about their care and that they would be listened to and addressed.

People told us the service was well-led and managed by an effective and organised management team.

Systems were in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service provided.

Staff felt supported and valued in their work. There were systems in place to monitor the quality of the care provided and to ensure people received quality care.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

This inspection took place on 17 November 2016. We gave the registered manager short notice as we needed to be sure she would be present to assist with the inspection.

Everycare (Central Hants) Limited provides domiciliary care support to 85 people in the community living in their own homes.

The service had a registered manager as required to manage its day to day operation. 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 the staff were caring and kind and supported their dignity and privacy effectively. Staff involved them in making decisions about their care and encouraged them to do what they could for themselves. The registered manager involved people in regular reviews about their care. Staff always sought people’s consent before providing personal care support.

Staff knew how to keep people safe and to respond to and report signs of possible abuse. Staff were confident the registered manager would respond appropriately to any issues raised and one member of staff confirmed this had been the case when they had passed on a concern.

The service had a robust recruitment process which helped to ensure staff had the skills and were suitable to care for vulnerable people. Staff received an appropriate induction and core training. More recent recruits completed the Care Certificate induction process. A programme of ongoing training was provided although some staff needed to attend refresher training. The registered manager had identified this and was taking steps to address any overdue training.

Staff care practice was monitored periodically through spot checks, carried out by management to observe their care practice. Staff received ongoing support through supervision meetings and appraisals. Not all staff had attended supervision within the provider’s parameters. This had been identified and supervisions were going to be planned into people’s daily call schedules to ensure they took place. Team meetings were infrequent but staff felt well supported through regular contact with the office and described the management team as supportive.

The service had a complaints procedure. Complaints were investigated and action was taken to address them. People’s views about the service had not been sought recently by means of a survey. However, their views had been sought in other ways and they felt management listened to their views. The feedback we obtained from people as part of the inspection was positive and where any issues had been raised they had been addressed.

Further developments were planned to monitoring systems, once the records had been fully transferred to the new computerised system. The registered manager and providers monitored and reviewed the operation of the service and changes had been made where issues were identified.

We had previously inspected Everycare (Central Hants) Limited on 21 January 2014. We found the service provider was not complying with the essential standard relating to records management. We asked the provider to tell us what they are going to do to achieve compliance and the provider sent us an action plan showing how it would address the issues found.

On 9 September 2014 we re-inspected Everycare (Central Hants) Limited to assess whether compliance with records management had been achieved.

We considered the evidence we had gathered to answer the question, ‘Is the service effective?’ Below is a summary of what we found.

Is the service effective?

People’s care records were person-centred and described their specific care needs. Risk assessments were up to date and care plans were relevant and informative. Care records in people’s own homes included documented care provided by staff. Staff created clear records which were signed, showing the date and time they delivered the care.

Records associated with the management of the service, such as staff recruitment and staff training are held the office and maintained regularly.

All records were stored safely yet readily available for staff to access when required. Records were regularly archived and electronic records were password protected and backed up.

Staff understood the importance of maintaining accurate records, and ensuring confidentiality.

We judged the service had achieved compliance with this essential standard.

During our inspection we spoke with the registered manager, directors of the service, office staff and five other care staff. We also spoke with four people who use the service or their relatives.

People told us they were happy with the service they received. Comments included: “I am very happy with the service” and “They do the best they can, I am satisfied”.

People told us they were involved in the planning of their care and support. They said care staff respected their views and their comments and opinions were taken into account when care plans were reviewed. People told us that they were contacted by the agency if the time of their visit needed to be changed.

People’s needs were assessed and care was planned and delivered in line with their individual care plan. We found that some records were not up to date however, and judged this had a minor impact on people as there was a risk that inappropriate care could be delivered.

For this inspection we spoke to five people or their relatives about the care they received. People told us that care workers provided care in a way that was respectful and caring. This included checking that people were happy to receive care before providing it. Staff confirmed this also meant respecting people’s decisions if they preferred not have the care they offered. One person said; “If I don’t need (an aspect of care), I just say so and they respect this and sit and chat instead.” Another said, “If I want to dress in something specific, I just let them know.”

People told us that they were involved in assessing their care needs. One person said, “We have drawn up details and the care workers must read and follow these instructions. It works smoothly.” Another person recalled having their needs re-assessed after being admitted to hospital. Their care needs had changed, and were reflected in their revised care plan.

Everyone we spoke with said they felt safe, and that if they had any comments to make they would contact the office. People told us that the office staff listened to their views. One person said; “They never let me down and there is always a care worker here when they say.”

We looked at a sample of care records, and they included clear guidance about the care and support that had been agreed for people. Records were held securely within the office.

We telephoned people who used Everycare (Central Hants) Ltd, to ask about their experiences of the care provided. People told us that they were treated with dignity and respect by staff who were competent and caring, as well as friendly. They said that they were satisfied with the care given and they said their needs were attended to with compassion. People said that they were involved in their care arrangements and that communication was effective.