Westminster Homecare Limited (Ipswich) provides personal care to people living in their own homes. At the time of this announced inspection of 13 June 2017 the registered manager told us there were 108 people who used the service, and 80% of these people received the personal care provision. The provider was given 24 hours’ notice of the inspection because the location provides a domiciliary care service and we needed to know that someone would be available.

At the last inspection of 16 February 2015 the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

There was 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.

There were systems in place which provided guidance for care workers on how to safeguard the people who used the service from the potential risk of abuse. Care workers understood their roles and responsibilities in keeping people safe. Where safeguarding issues had arisen the service learned from these and used their learning to improve the service and reduce the risks of incidents happening again.

There were processes in place to ensure the safety of the people who used the service. These included risk assessments which identified how the risks to people were minimised. Where people required assistance to take their medicines there were arrangements in place to provide this support safely.

Care workers were available to ensure that planned visits to people were completed. People were supported by care workers who were trained and supported to meet their needs. Where people required assistance with their dietary needs there were systems in place to provide this support safely. Where required, people were provided support to access health care professionals.

Care workers had good relationships with people who used the service. People were involved in making decisions about their care and support. People received care and support which was planned and delivered to meet their specific needs.

The service had a quality assurance system and shortfalls were identified and addressed. As a result the quality of the service continued to improve. A complaints procedure was in place.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

There is a current investigation ongoing. Once we receive the outcomes of this we will consider our regulatory response and report on it, if required.

Westminster Homecare Limited (Ipswich) provides personal care support to people living in their own homes. When we inspected on 16 February 2015 there were 102 people who used the service, 93 of these people received personal care support. This was an announced inspection. The provider was given 48 hours’ notice because the location provides a domiciliary care service.

There was no 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. There was a manager in post who had submitted an application to register with the Care Quality Commission.

There were procedures in place which safeguarded the people who used the service from the potential risk of abuse. Care workers understood the various types of abuse and knew who to report any concerns to.

There were procedures and processes in place to ensure the safety of the people who used the service. These included risk assessments which identified how the risks to people were minimised.

Where people required assistance to take their medicines there were appropriate arrangements in place to provide this support safely.

There were sufficient numbers of care workers who were trained and supported to meet the needs of the people who used the service.

People, or their representatives, were involved in making decisions about their care and support. People’s care plans had been tailored to the individual and contained information about how they communicated and their ability to make decisions.

Care workers had good relationships with people who used the service and were attentive to their needs.

Where care workers had identified concerns in people’s wellbeing there were systems in place to contact health and social care professionals to make sure they received appropriate care and treatment.

Where people required assistance with their dietary needs there were systems in place to provide this support safely.

A complaints procedure was in place. People’s concerns and complaints were listened to, addressed in a timely manner and used to improve the service.

Care workers understood their roles and responsibilities in providing safe and good quality care to the people who used the service. The service had a quality assurance system and shortfalls were addressed promptly. As a result the quality of the service continued to improve.

We did not speak with people who used the service during this inspection.

Our last inspection of 25 July 2013 found that the provider was not meeting the standards for Regulation 13, outcome 9. This was because the service did not protect people against the risks associated with the unsafe use and management of medication by way of appropriate arrangements for the administration recording of medicines. The provider wrote to us to tell us the actions they had taken to address the shortfalls. We undertook a follow up inspection 27 September 2013 to check that the improvements had been made. We looked at records associated with medication administration including medication administration records of 15 people who used the service and staff training records. We found that improvements had been made.

At the time of our inspection there were 106 people who used the service. We spoke with nineteen people who used the service and two people's carers. We also spoke with one care worker, the registered manager and two office staff members.

People told us that they were satisfied with the service that they were provided with and that their care workers treated them with kindness and respect. One person said, "I am very happy with them, I would not consider changing them ever." Another person said, "I am more than happy with (care worker), they are courteous and gentle with me." Another person told us, "They are great, do what I ask and do it well." Another said, "I have no complaints, they are very good."

We looked at the care records of ten people who used the service and found that people experienced care, treatment and support that met their needs and protected their rights. We found that medication adminstration records were not appropriately completed to show that people had been assisted with their medication at the prescribed times.

We looked at the personnel records of four care workers. We found that recruitment checks were made to ensure that people who used the service were suitable to work with vulnerable people. People were supported by care workers who were trained and supported to meet their needs.

There were systems in place to monitor and assess the service that people were provided with. Complaints were listened to and acted upon.

We spoke to four people who used the service. They were all complimentary about the care they received. One said, "They (the staff) are all lovely."

People we spoke with felt involved in planning their care package. The manager visited people in their home to carry out an assessment of their needs before care was provided.

We looked at five care plans. We saw that these were fully completed and contained personal details, care assessments, times of care visits, risk assessments, care plans and care worker visit reports. The care needs of the individual were clearly identified in the care plan.

The service had sufficient staff to meet the needs of the people who used it. People told us that staff were, "Usually on time" and "Encourage me to have a go myself". Staff had a structured induction programme and there was a system in place to ensure it was updated.

We spoke with four people who use the service. They told us that their care workers are reliable, trustworthy and competent and understand their needs. They also told us that they are fully consulted about their care plans and asked for their views about the service they receive. They said that they feel safe with their care workers and their privacy and dignity is respected.