• Services in your home
  • Homecare service

Archived: MacDonald Care Services

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Braemar, Crowhurst Road, Lingfield, Surrey, RH7 6DA (01342) 835201

Provided and run by:
Mrs Jacqueline Bailey

All Inspections

15 May 2018

During a routine inspection

MacDonald Care Services is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own home’s in the community. Not everyone using MacDonald Care Services receives the 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. At the time of the inspection the provider was providing personal care to 35 people.

This inspection took place on 16 May 2018. We gave the provider two days’ notice of the inspection as we needed to make sure they would be available. At our last inspection on 14 March 2016 the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good. The service demonstrated they continued to meet the regulations and fundamental standards.

The registered provider managed the service. 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.

The service had safeguarding and whistle-blowing procedures in place and staff had a clear understanding of these procedures. Appropriate recruitment checks took place before staff started work. There was enough staff available to meet people’s care and support needs. Risks to people had been assessed and reviewed regularly to ensure their needs were safely met. Incidents and accidents were monitored and where trends were identified action was taken to reduce the likelihood of them happening again. Medicines were managed appropriately and people were receiving their medicines as prescribed by health care professionals. Staff had received training in infection control and food hygiene and they were aware of the steps to take to reduce the risk of the spread of infections.

Assessments of people’s care and support needs were carried out before they started using the service. Staff completed an induction when they started work and they received training relevant to people’s needs. People’s care files included assessments relating to their dietary support needs. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

Staff treated people in a caring, respectful and dignified manner. People and their relatives had been consulted about their care and support needs. People could communicate their needs effectively and could understand information in the current written format provided. People were confident their complaints would be listened to and acted on. Staff said they would support people according to their diverse needs. There were systems in place to provide people with end of life care and support if required.

The provider recognised the importance of monitoring the quality of the service provided to people. They took people’s views into account through spot checks and satisfaction surveys. Staff said they enjoyed working at the service and they received good support from the provider and office staff. There was an out of hours on call system in operation that ensured management support and advice was always available for staff when they needed it.

14 March 2016

During a routine inspection

The inspection was announced and took place on 14 March 2016.

MacDonald Care Services is a small family run domiciliary care agency that provides personal care to people in their own homes in the areas of East Grinstead, Crawley, Turners Hill, Lingfield and Dormansland. People who receive a service include those living with physical frailty or memory loss due to the progression of age. At the time of this inspection the agency was providing a service to 61 people, the majority of whom were aged between 80 and 90. The frequency of visits ranged from one visit to four visits per day depending on people’s individual needs.

During our inspection the registered manager was present. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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.

The feedback we received from people was excellent. People expressed great satisfaction and spoke very highly of the registered manager and care workers.

The safety of people who used the service was taken very seriously and the registered manager and staff were well aware of their responsibility to protect people’s health and wellbeing. There were systems in place to ensure that risks to people’s safety and wellbeing were identified and addressed.

The registered manager ensured that staff had a full understanding of people’s care needs and had the skills and knowledge to meet them. People received consistent support from care workers who knew them well. People felt safe and secure when receiving care.

People had positive relationships with their care workers and were confident in the service. There was a strong emphasis on key principles of care such as compassion, respect and dignity. People who used the service felt they were treated with kindness and said their privacy and dignity was always respected.

People received a service that was based on their personal needs and wishes. Changes in people’s needs were quickly identified and their care package amended to meet their changing needs. The service was very flexible and responded very positively to people’s requests. People who used the service felt able to make requests and express their opinions and views. The agency was proactive in involving people and working in partnership with them to access services and facilities in their local community. The agency regularly provided support above that what was required to enhance people’s quality of life.

The registered manager was very committed to continuous improvement and feedback from people, whether positive or negative, was used as an opportunity for improvement. The registered manager demonstrated a good understanding of the importance of effective quality assurance systems. There were processes in place to monitor quality and understand the experiences of people who used the service.

Staff were very highly motivated and proud of the service. They said that they were fully supported by the registered manager and a programme of training and supervision that enabled them to provide a high quality service to people.

4 November 2013

During a routine inspection

We spoke with three people who used the service, three relatives and three staff members. Four care plans and other records were examined.

People told us they were "very pleased" with the service provided and they "couldn't fault it." They said the care was "excellent" and that staff and the manager "go that extra mile" to make sure they were happy. People said they had the same people providing their care and they were "very prompt."

The care plans we saw contained information for the staff to understand the needs of the person and how they should be helped. The information in them varied in the amount of detail provided and this was brought to the attention of the manager. We saw that staff completed daily records in which was recorded the care and support provided on each visit.

We looked at staff files and saw that staff were recruited following the receipt of the necessary information and checks to ensure they were fit to carry out the work. Staff told us they felt "very well supported" by the manager and confirmed they had completed the training necessary to undertake their tasks. Their performance was kept under review by the manager, who also worked alongside them to offer further guidance and support.

The opinions of the people who used the service were sought, both formally and informally. Users of the service and their relatives told us they could discuss any aspect of it with the manager at any time if they wished.

14 January 2013

During a routine inspection

People told us that they were treated with respect and dignity by their carers. Preferred names were used and people were seen by the same carer or team of carers for most of the time. We saw evidence that dignity and respect were covered in staff induction and training and both the manager and staff were able to confirm this. People felt involved in their care planning and care plan reviews. People and staff confirmed that copies of care plans are kept in peoples homes and staff referred to them regularly.

We looked at four people's care plans which have been developed for each individual and recorded their wishes and preferences to how their care is provided. Care plans had been signed by people using the service and we also looked at the daily record books completed by carers. These accurately reflected the tasks, time of day and length of time for each set of tasks within the care plans.

The manager has systems in place to check that the quality of care was to a high standard this included good practice methods for training and spot checks on staff carrying out their duties.

23 December 2011

During a routine inspection

People and their carer's we spoke with were all very happy with the care and support that they receive. They told us that they were involved in decisions about their care and support. Three People said that the service was 'Excellent'.

People or their representative all said that their plan of care is discussed with them, their agreed plan of care is carried out and that they receive their care from familiar staff.

All people said that the staff were polite, caring, kind and respectful. Some people told us that their visits were never rushed, and the staff are always willing to take time to talk with them. A person using the service described the staff as being like 'their second family'.

People said that the staff never miss their calls. They usually visit them on time but if they were running late they would always telephone to let them know.

People said they would be confident to approach the agency if they had any concerns but they have never had the need to.