Care and Social Services Inspectorate Wales Care Standards Act 2000 Inspection Report Village Homecare Services (Wales) Ltd 30 Uplands Crescent Uplands SA2 0PB Type of Inspection – Baseline Date of inspection – Tuesday, 27 January 2015 Date of publication – Monday, 23 March 2015 Welsh Government © Crown copyright 2014. You may use and re-use the information featured in this publication (not including logos) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government License. You can view the Open Government License, on the National Archives website or you can write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or email: psi@nationalarchives.gsi.gov.uk You must reproduce our material accurately and not use it in a misleading context. Page 1 Summary About the service Village Home Care is a large domiciliary care agency which currently provides a service to people living in Swansea, Carmarthenshire, Caerphilly and Newport Local Authority areas. The registered office is in Swansea, with satellite offices in Ammanford and Caerphilly. The registered provider is Village Home Care Services Wales Limited, which is part of the MITIE group. The registered manager is Emma Lewis. What type of inspection was carried out? This was a scheduled announced baseline inspection which looked at the themes of the quality of life for people using the service, the quality of staffing and the quality of leadership and management. This inspection was carried out by one inspector. The methods used were: Visits and telephone calls to people using the service, including discussions with their relatives where appropriate An announced visit to the agency’s registered office A visit to one of the satellite offices Examination of documentation relating to the five people Examination of three staff files Examination the staff training matrix and training programme Discussion with staff Discussion with the Registered Manager What does the service do well? There were no areas of exceptional practice identified during the inspection What has improved since the last inspection? The length of call times was clearly monitored and any variation from the scheduled time was investigated and documented. What needs to be done to improve the service? The registered persons were notified that they were non compliant with Regulation 16 (2) (a) as staff had not received training updates in a timely manner. The registered persons were informed that they were non compliant with Regulation 23 (2) and (3) as there was no evidence that the quality monitoring system was fully developed and there was no annual quality of care report. It is recommended that the registered persons ensure that the systems for confirming that care is not commenced without a suitable assessment and care plan in place and for recording the updating of care plans is reviewed. Page 2 It is recommended that the registered persons carry out a review of the staffing levels and workload to ensure there are sufficient staff to complete all the contracted care. It is also recommended that the registered persons discuss preferred hours with all staff and clearly document their decision about whether they are willing to do extra hours. Page 3 Quality Of Life People receiving a service can feel reasonably assured that they will be provided with care that can meet their needs. We (CSSIW) spoke to people using the service and their relatives both on the telephone and face to face and they told us that they were generally satisfied with the care from the agency. They felt that they received the care that had been agreed with their care manager. They also told us that staff from the agency had come to assess them prior to care being commenced. We looked at a sample of care files, including two for people who had recently started receiving care and found that they were well completed documents. However a concern had been reported that care plans were not put in place before care was commenced and this issue was also highlighted in one response from a staff questionnaire. In the records seen in the office we did not find any evidence of this. We also visited one person who had recently started receiving a service from the agency and we saw all the relevant paperwork in place in the house. However we discussed the process of instigating care plans with the registered manager and the manager of one the satellite offices. Both described a process of ensuring that they saw the care plans and signed them off before care is commenced. Another concern had been reported that the care plans were not updated and therefore contained out of date information. No evidence of this was found in the sample of care plans seen during the inspection. However in the light of the concerns expressed to CSSIW and the information from staff it is recommended that the registered persons ensure that the systems for confirming that care is not commenced without a suitable assessment and care plan in place and for recording the updating of care plans is reviewed. We looked at the medication policy and procedure as a number of medication errors had occurred and been reported through the safeguarding process since the previous inspection. We discussed this with the registered manager who explained that the medication training had been updated and there was also a medication quiz for staff to complete. Competency checks and spot checks on staff were also carried out and documented. We found that action had been taken to reduce the number of medication errors but this needs to continue to be given a high priority to ensure that medication errors are significantly reduced. Page 4 Quality Of Staffing People using the service cannot be completely confident that staff are fully competent or that they will always receive continuity of care from familiar staff. However people said that the large majority of staff were caring and helpful. We looked at three staff files and found that they contained all the required documentation including application forms, photographs, Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks and references. We therefore found that there was evidence of a robust recruitment process. A concern had been expressed about staff working in excess of 50 hours per week , not having enough breaks and having less that eleven hours between shifts. We discussed the staffing levels with the registered manager and satellite office manager and looked at the information returned in the staff questionnaires. It was clear that there has been a turnover of staff and despite working at staff recruitment and retention the agency had continuing staff vacancies. This meant that there was not always continuity of staff for people using the service and this was commented on in questionnaires returned from people using the service. It also meant that staff were asked to cover extra hours and some were happy to do this. However a concern has been expressed that staff who did not want to work extra hours may feel pressurised to do so. We discussed the workload and were informed that currently new packages of care were only taken on when there was a vacancy created from the end of a previous package of care. We saw that staff were asked to opt out of the Working Time Directive as part of the recruitment process and therefore were asked to agree to have less than eleven hours between shifts. It is recommended that the registered persons carry out a review of the staffing levels and workload to ensure there are sufficient staff to complete all the contracted care. It is also recommended that the registered persons discuss preferred hours with all staff and clearly document their decision about whether they are willing to do extra hours. A concern had been expressed that staff were not sufficiently trained before commencing employment or during their on going employment. We looked at the induction process and saw that a suitable system was in place. When we looked at a selection of the staff files we saw records of completed induction training. We looked at the staff training matrix and discussed the training with the registered manager and training team. We were informed that the training programme had been updated with some training to be completed on line, there was also training available at weekends and during the evenings to encourage staff to attend. We also looked at the updated medication training programme and saw evidence of training and competency checks in staff files. However it was clear from the training matrix that some of the update training had not taken place in a timely manner and was therefore out of date. This had also been an issue identified at the previous inspection. The registered persons were notified that they were non compliant with Regulation 16 (2) (a) as staff hade not received training updates in a timely manner. We discussed the call allocation with staff, including those who worked as part of the team monitoring the timing and length of calls. We saw that there was a new Electronic Page 5 Call Monitoring System, which was screened by staff during the hours when calls were being made. This allows the office staff to know if a call has been missed or is late and provides information about the length of the call. We discussed the amount of travelling time allocated between calls and found that different systems were used in different areas. We were told that some Local Authority commissioners included travel time in their commissioning process, particularly in the rural areas when there could be long distances between calls. In the city we saw that five minutes was uniformly provided on the staff schedules as travel time between calls. It is recommended that travel time between calls is reviewed to ensure that staff are provided with sufficient time between calls. We looked at the supervision records in staff files. The records included annual appraisals, supervision and spot checks carried out in the community. We found that overall people felt they had good interactions with staff when familiar staff were carrying out their care. However because of the turnover of staff people were sometimes cared for by staff who did not know them. We also found that, despite the supervision system there was some feelings of stress amongst staff. Page 6 Quality Of Leadership and Management Overall people can be assured that the registered persons have put a clear management structure in place to ensure that the business is well run. However there is a need to develop the quality monitoring system and to complete an annual quality of care report. We have received an application to change the registered provider of this service, and others, to Mihomecare. This application is currently being processed as CSSIW and will mean that once the registration process is complete this service will merge with another domiciliary care agency in Swansea and the satellite branches will be separately registered with their own registered manager. We saw that there was clear information about the service, including service user guides provided to people receiving a service. People told us that they felt they were receiving the service they expected and that they were contacted and visited by supervisors from the agency who discussed and reviewed their care. We saw that there was information gathered from quality questionnaires sent out to people using the service. However there was no overall quality of care report available including the views of Local Authority commissioners and staff as people using the service and their representatives. The registered persons were therefore informed that they were non compliant with Regulation 23 (2) and (3). We found that although there were the expected management and administration systems in place there was a need to develop the quality monitoring processes to ensure that they resulted in improved outcomes for people using the service and effective support for staff. Page 7 Quality Of The Environment Not applicable for Dom Care Agency Page 8 How we inspect and report on services We conduct two types of inspection; baseline and focussed. Both consider the experience of people using services. Baseline inspections assess whether the registration of a service is justified and whether the conditions of registration are appropriate. For most services, we carry out these inspections every three years. Exceptions are registered child minders, out of school care, sessional care, crèches and open access provision, which are every four years. At these inspections we check whether the service has a clear, effective Statement of Purpose and whether the service delivers on the commitments set out in its Statement of Purpose. In assessing whether registration is justified inspectors check that the service can demonstrate a history of compliance with regulations. Focused inspections consider the experience of people using services and we will look at compliance with regulations when poor outcomes for people using services are identified. We carry out these inspections in between baseline inspections. Focussed inspections will always consider the quality of life of people using services and may look at other areas. Baseline and focused inspections may be scheduled or carried out in response to concerns. Inspectors use a variety of methods to gather information during inspections. These may include; Talking with people who use services and their representatives Talking to staff and the manager Looking at documentation Observation of staff interactions with people and of the environment Comments made within questionnaires returned from people who use services, staff and health and social care professionals We inspect and report our findings under ‘Quality Themes’. Those relevant to each type of service are referred to within our inspection reports. Further information about what we do can be found in our leaflet ‘Improving Care and Social Services in Wales’. You can download this from our website, Improving Care and Social Services in Wales or ask us to send you a copy by telephoning your local CSSIW regional office. Page 9
© Copyright 2024