The Care Quality Commission
  • Services in your home
  • Homecare service

Archived: HomeLife Carers Limited

Unit 1 Cedar Court, Tiverton Business Park, Tiverton, Devon, EX16 6GT (01884) 233700

Provided and run by:
Home Life Carers Limited

Important: This service is now registered at a different address - see new profile

All Inspections

25 April 2014

During a routine inspection

Our inspection team was made up of one inspector who helped to answer our five questions: Is the service caring? Is the service responsive? Is the service safe? Is the service effective? Is the service well led?

Is the service safe?

People told us that they felt safe with the careworkers and that they felt staff had received training to ensure that they knew what they were doing.

Individual risk assessments were undertaken before care was delivered and care plans to address the risks were put in place to support people's safety.

Staff were able to describe what to do if they had a safeguarding concern which showed that they understood how to safeguard the people they supported. One member of staff told us they had raised a safeguarding concern about a person they cared for. During our inspection we heard the manager talk on the phone to the safeguarding team about a person they were concerned about. We saw that they logged the phone call and followed it up when they had not had a response.

There were systems in place to make sure managers and staff learned from events such as accidents and incidents, complaints, and concerns which reduced the risks to people and helped the service to continually improve. The provider had plans in place to deal with unforeseen emergencies including adverse weather.

The registered manager and coordinators were responsible for drawing up staff rotas taking into account numbers, qualifications, skills and experience required, when considering people's care needs. There was low staff turnover, which meant people and staff knew each other well. Staff were accompanied when they visited a person for the first time to ensure they understood what was required.

Care records, staff records and maintenance logs were kept up to date and were stored in a safe, secure environment.

Is the service effective?

People's health and care needs were assessed and written in care plans. People said they had been involved in writing their care plan and they reflected their current needs.

People were supported to maximise their independence over time, one relative told us "I am sure that having HomeLife has enabled my uncle to stay at home these last three years."

People told us that the careworkers helped to ensure that they took their medications at the right time. Another person told us that the careworkers were "crucial as they ensured that I can have a regular shower."

People were able to agree when a careworker visited them to suit their personal requirements. They told us that when they needed to make a change to the routine that this was also possible.

Is the service caring?

People told us "the girls are really good, they always ask if there is anything else they can do for me before they leave." Another person told us "they are always happy to make me a cup of tea even though that isn't their job."

All the people we talked to told us they were supported by kind and attentive staff. One person told us "whilst there are some that you like better than others, they are all really good." Another person told us staff had stayed longer than the allocated time on an occasion because they had had a problem.

We talked to staff, who told us that they got to know the people they cared for really well and enjoyed their visits. During visits, we observed staff talking to people in a friendly way, taking an interest in their lives and showing that they had a good knowledge of the person's preferences. Whilst they always maintained a professional attitude, they were also friendly and able to share a joke. Some people told us they really looked forward to having their visit as the careworkers provided them with important human contact.

We saw evidence that the provider had responded positively to complaints and suggestions for improvements.

Is the service responsive?

People knew how to make a complaint if they were unhappy. People told us they had not had to make a formal complaint but they felt happy to raise any concerns or issues with staff who would help to resolve them. They told us if that did not solve the issue they would also contact the manager who was always happy to help with a problem.

We spoke with the manager who told us they worked with the local authority if they felt that the care package commissioned, did not meet the person's requirements. They told us this had led to changes to the amount of time a person received. One example of this was where the initial package had designated that a person would receive a thirty minute visit each morning, but since the person had wanted to have a bath on a Wednesday, there had not been enough time in the time allocation. The senior care worker told us they had discussed this with the commissioner and agreed the time could be increased to three-quarters of an hour.

We observed the manager followed through a safeguarding issue that careworkers had brought to their attention regarding possible abuse of a person from a relative. The manager contacted the district nurses who also expressed their concern, and then also contacted the safeguarding team to alert them to the problem.

We saw evidence that people were signposted to independent advocacy services.

Is the service well-led?

The manager and senior workers worked together to ensure staff were supported to deliver care to people according to their needs. They provided support and guidance when staff had concerns.

Staff told us they were clear about their roles and responsibilities. Staff had a good understanding of the ethos of the provider and worked to promote good relationships with all the people and other staff. This helped to ensure that people received a good quality service at all times.

Staff received regular supervision from their managers and also told us that they felt confident they would get support if they needed help. Staff were given training in addition to the mandatory training to help them support people with different needs, some of which required specialist knowledge.

18 June 2013

During a routine inspection

This inspection took place over two days in June 2013. We visited the agency's office unannounced on the first day and spent the next day telephoning people who used the agency's services. At the time of the inspection the agency was providing domestic or personal care services to approximately 130 people in their own homes.

We spoke with 17 people using the service, or their representatives. We also met or spoke by phone with 11 staff, including the registered manager. Prior to our visit we had been contacted by three people separately with information about the agency.

Comments about the agency included; 'All of the carers, without exception, have been very good indeed.' 'On the whole they are very good, but inclined to chop and change a bit with the schedule' and 'I love it, they talk to me'and do what I ask.'

In addition to gaining people's views about how involved they were in the planning and delivery of their care we looked at the agency's systems for maintaining high standards of hygiene and infection control. We also assessed the provider's complaints management and internal quality control processes.

The agency met the four standards we inspected.

During an inspection looking at part of the service

This desk top review was carried out to review actions and improvements taken by the agency since or inspection on 12 January 2011. The registered manager sent us evidence to show that they had improved their recruitment procedures and to show that appropriate checks were undertaken before staff began work.

28 June 2012

During a themed inspection looking at Domiciliary Care Services

We carried out a themed inspection looking at domiciliary care services. We asked people to tell us what it was like to receive services from this home care agency as part of a targeted inspection programme of domiciliary care agencies with particular regard to how people's dignity was upheld and how they can make choices about their care. The inspection team was led by a CQC inspector joined by an Expert by Experience, who had experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of service.

We visited four people in their own home as part of this review and spoke with them and their relatives about their experiences of the support they have received. During our visit to the agency office we met and spoke with seven members of staff who were based there, and also three care workers who visited the office. The manager was on leave at the time of our inspection but we spoke with them on the telephone. We spoke with the provider on the telephone. We also talked to 14 people on the telephone.

All of the people we visited or spoke with were positive about the service they received from the agency and thought they were very professional. Comments included 'Brilliant!' and 'I cannot speak highly enough of the girls.'

People felt their dignity and independence was respected. We heard examples of the procedures followed by the care workers to ensure people received personal care in a private and dignified manner. Care workers addressed people by their preferred names.

People told us that their care was personalised to their needs. We heard examples of care workers following instructions provided by specialist health care professionals to use equipment safely, to help people with daily exercises to help keep them mobile, and to check their skin, including pressure areas, every day to prevent skin problems.

Everybody interviewed said that they felt quite safe and their wellbeing was being looked after. They said they had no hesitation ringing the office if they had any concerns or complaints. Comments included 'Any worries ' sorted without fuss.'

12, 14 January 2011

During a routine inspection

We telephoned seven people who currently use the agency from their client list of approximately 100 people. Everyone we spoke with by telephone was very satisfied with the agency. Some of these people had made complaints to the service in the past and told us that their concerns had been handled in a professional way that resolved issues to their satisfaction. Comments that people made about the agency included.

'Staff are 'charming and polite.'

' For the staff 'nothing is too much trouble.'

' 'It is a joy to have them in my home.'

' They are 'courteous, prompt to respond, efficient and universally helpful.'

' 'I am happy with Home Life; they understand my concerns and needs.'

' They are 'marvellous.'

' They are 'lovely, can't fault them.'

Prior to our review we were also contacted by two relatives of two people using the agency. The relatives had recently raised complaints to the agency and were not happy with the response from the agency. One person was dissatisfied that the agency had withdrawn services to their relative. Another person had complaints about the standard of care and record keeping by agency staff. We looked at how the agency handled these complaints and saw that it took swift action to engage with the people who were unhappy in order to resolve disputes.