You are here

This service was previously registered at a different address - see old profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 24 February 2017

This inspection visit took place at 1st For Care on 30 January 2017 and was announced. We told the registered manager before our visit that we would be coming. We did this to ensure we had access to the main office and the management team were available.

1st for Care (GB) Ltd is a domiciliary care agency which provides care and support to people with complex care needs to people living in their own home. 1st for Care (GB) Ltd offers a service nationally but has its office base in Lancaster. At the time of the inspection 1st for Care (GB) Ltd was providing domiciliary care to two people.

There was a registered manager in place. 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.

This was the first inspection since the agency changed location. However previous inspections had been carried out at the last location.

We found the service had systems in place to record safeguarding concerns, accidents and incidents and take necessary action as required. Staff had received safeguarding training and understood their responsibilities to provide safe care for people.

The registered manager made sure new staff had a full employment history and obtained recruitment checks before employing them. Staffing levels were sufficient to meet people’s needs and their agreed care packages.

Risk assessments had been developed to minimise potential risk of harm to people during delivery of their care and when staff visited homes of people. These had been reviewed when changes occurred.

Staff knew people they supported and provided a service that was suited for the individual. Care plans were in place detailing how people wished their care to be delivered. People told us they had been involved in making decisions about their care.

People supported by the service told us staff who visited them were polite, reliable, patient and respectful in their approach to their work. A comment included, “They are very good and caring people.”

The registered manager understood the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

The service had a complaints procedure which was made available to people when they received a service. One person we spoke with told us they were happy and had no complaints.

The registered manager used a variety of methods to assess and monitor the quality of the service. These included spot checks, care plan reviews and staff meetings.

Staff and one person who received a service told us the registered manager was supportive and approachable. The registered manager met with people and provided opportunities for them to comment about the quality of their care.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 24 February 2017

The service was safe.

Recruitment procedures the service had in place were safe.

The provider had procedures in place to protect people from abuse and unsafe care.

Assessments were undertaken of risks to people who used the service and staff. Written plans were in place to manage these risks.

There were processes for recording accidents and incidents.

Staffing levels were sufficient with an appropriate skill mix to meet the needs of people who used the service.

Effective

Good

Updated 24 February 2017

The service was effective.

People were supported by staff who were sufficiently trained, skilled and experienced to support them to have a good quality of life. They were aware of the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

When required people would be supported to eat and drink according to their plan of care.

Caring

Good

Updated 24 February 2017

The service was caring.

People who used the service were treated with kindness and respect by staff at 1st For Care.

Care and support had been provided in accordance with people’s needs and wishes.

People were involved in their care planning and their delivery of care. This which was evidenced in care records.

Staff were respectful of people’s rights and privacy.

Responsive

Good

Updated 24 February 2017

The service was responsive.

Care plans were in place outlining people’s care and support needs. Staff were knowledgeable about people’s support needs.

The registered manager had a system to ensure people’s records were updated both at the office and in their own homes.

The registered manager had a variety of systems to check and manage people’s complaints and concerns if they had any.

Well-led

Good

Updated 24 February 2017

The service was well led.

Systems and procedures were in place to monitor and assess the quality of service people received.

The registered manager consulted with stakeholders, people they supported and relatives for their input on how the service could continually improve.

A range of audits were in place to monitor the health, safety and welfare of people. The views of people who used the service were sought in a variety of ways.

Quality assurance was checked upon and action was taken to make improvements, where necessary.