Our current view of the service
Updated
23 February 2024
Date of assessment 10 May 2024 to 14 May 2024.
The assessment was prompted by information we received about the provider's licence for sponsoring visas for international staff. We assessed 15 quality statements and found a good standard of care was being provided. Rings Homecare Greater Manchester, is a domiciliary care service, registered to provide personal care to people living in their own homes. At the time of this assessment 32 people received personal care. People and their relatives told us safe care was provided by staff who knew people well and staff wore personal protective equipment (PPE) as required. Staff were recruited safely; pre-employment checks were completed to ensure applicants were of suitable character to work with vulnerable people. People and relatives spoke positively about the timeliness of care visits and the continuity of care and carers. Medicines were managed safely. Staff received enough training, supervision and support to carry out their roles safely and effectively. The provider had an up to date safeguarding policy and the registered manager followed the local authority reporting guidance. Staff received training in safeguarding and knew how to report any concerns. The provider learned from incidents and followed the duty of candour when things had gone wrong. The provider worked closely with the local authority to support people; they told us the registered manager was open and transparent and was helping to drive improvements. Care plans had risk assessments which were specific to each person. People and relatives were involved in care planning and completed surveys about care quality. The providers' audits captured information about actions and improvements as well as accident, incident and safeguarding records. There was evidence within care files of care reviews being completed.
People's experience of the service
Updated
23 February 2024
We spoke with 3 relatives and 1 person using the service about their experiences of the quality of care. The feedback we received was positive and reflected a service focused on providing good standards of care. Everyone consistently reported the care provided to be very good, with no issues raised; a recent change in management was reported to have improved the service to a great extent. People and relatives knew how to complain but had not needed to. Care files explained whether people had capacity and had consented to their care and treatment. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. People received kind care. A relative told us, "Care is very good and the staff are all extremely kind and caring. There is great communication across the board with all the care staff and management and any problems they respond and liaise extremely well." Staff protected and respected people’s privacy and dignity; they understood and responded to people's individual needs. Risk assessments identified people had been actively involved in their completion. People and relatives told us risks were managed effectively and they were kept up to date with any issues or changes. People and relatives told us staff never rushed and were reliable and on-time; they told us staff were passionate and genuinley cared about their work. Where necessary, the provider or registered manager had written to people to apologise and explain what actions had been taken to address any concerns reported, in line with the Duty of Candour. Staff were matched to the needs of the people they supported. A person told us, "I would happily recommend them [the provider] they are really good." People and relatives told us their homes were kept safe and secure during and after visits from care staff.