You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 2 March 2017

This inspection was announced and took place on 16 and 17 November 2016. We told the provider 48 hours before our visit that we would be coming to ensure that the people we needed to talk to would be available.

Agape Care Solutions has 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.

Agape Care Solutions provides personal care and support to people who live in their own homes. At the time of the inspection they were providing over 200 hours per week to nine people living in Dorset.

At our previous inspection in April 2016 we found a number of shortfalls and issued warning notices with regard to the assessment and provision of care and the management of medicines, the safe recruitment, training and supervision of staff. We found further shortfalls in the management if risks, protection of people from abuse, governance and record keeping. Requirement notices were issued in these areas. The service was rated inadequate overall and placed in special measures. This comprehensive inspection was carried out to ensure that the service had met the requirements of the warning notices and made improvements in the other areas that had been identified.

At this inspection we found that the service had taken all of the required actions and no breaches in the regulations were found. This means that the service will no longer be in special measures. This was because the registered manager had stepped back from working as a member of care staff as well as managing the service and had concentrated on putting policies and procedures in place, updating staff training and ensuring that the service was providing the quality of care and support that was required by people.

People told us their care and support needs were met and that staff were kind, caring and respectful. People also said they felt safe and had confidence in the staff that worked for the service.

Staff knew people well and understood their needs. Care plans were detailed and regularly reviewed. This meant that there was always information for staff to refer to when providing care for people.

The provider had implemented satisfactory systems to recruit and train staff in a way that ensured that relevant checks and references were carried out and staff were competent to undertake the tasks required of them. The number of staff employed and the skills they had were sufficient to meet the needs of the people they supported and keep them safe.

People were protected from harm and abuse wherever possible. There were systems in place to reduce and manage identified risks. Staff understood how to protect people from possible abuse and how to whistle-blow. People knew how to raise concerns and complaints and records showed that these were investigated and responded to.

There was a clear management structure in place. People and care staff said was the managers were approachable and supportive. There were systems in place to monitor the safety and quality of the service.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 2 March 2017

The service was safe.

People were protected from harm because risks were identified and managed appropriately.

There were safe medication administration systems in place and people received their medicines when required.

There were sufficient staff with the right skills and knowledge to meet people’s needs.

Effective

Good

Updated 2 March 2017

The service was effective.

People were supported by staff who were themselves supported through regular training and supervision.

People’s rights were protected because staff followed the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Wherever possible people consented to their care, and where they lacked the mental capacity to consent, best interests decisions were made.

Caring

Good

Updated 2 March 2017

The service was caring.

People found their care workers supportive and respectful.

People were satisfied that their care and support needs were met by caring staff.

Responsive

Good

Updated 2 March 2017

The service was responsive to people’s changing needs.

People received the care they needed with care plans reflecting their individual needs. Plans were regularly reviewed and updated.

The agency had a complaints procedure and people felt able to raise any concerns

Well-led

Good

Updated 2 March 2017

The service was well led.

There were systems in place to monitor, and where necessary to improve, the quality of service provided.

There was a positive culture where people and staff were confident to report any concerns to the management team.