• Services in your home
  • Homecare service

Archived: Nightingales of Kidderminster

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Wolverley Road, Wolverley, Kidderminster, Worcestershire, DY10 3RP (01562) 851738

Provided and run by:
Nightingales of Kidderminster Limited

All Inspections

14 October 2015.

During a routine inspection

This announced inspection took place on 14 October 2015. We gave the registered provider’s 48 hours’ notice of the inspection. This was because the organisation provides a domiciliary care service to people who live in their homes or a family members home and we needed to be sure someone would be available at the office.

The provider registered this service with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to provide personal care and support for people with a range of varying needs including people who were living with dementia. People either lived in the own home or with a relative or friend. At the time of this inspection the agency was providing personal care to about 22 adults.

There was a registered manager for this service. 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. The registered manager was however on holiday when we carried out our inspection and therefore was not available. The registered manager was also registered to manage another service on the same site. People we spoke with and all the staff told us they rarely spoke with the registered manager but liaised more with the care coordinator.

People and their relatives told us they had no concerns about the quality of care provided by staff working at the agency. We were told staff treated people with dignity and respect and were caring while they provided support. Staff were aware of their responsibilities in the event of abuse taking place and had received appropriate training.

People confirmed that their consent was obtained prior to them receiving care and support and staff we spoke with had an understanding of the importance of this to ensure they were working in line with the law. Staff told us they received training to provide them the skills and knowledge to care and support people and meet their individual needs.

People told us they received support with preparing meals were this was needed. People were confident they would receive suitable support if they were unwell. Relatives told us staff had contacted them if they were concerned about their family member and had accessed health care professionals

People and their relatives were confident they could raise any concerns they had with office based staff and believed these would be taken seriously. People told us staff arrived on time and they received care from a regular team of staff who they knew. People told us they were made aware of any changes or if staff were delayed for any reason.

Systems were in place to monitor the quality of the service provided. The monitoring of the service was not always fully effective to identify issues within the care records. When shortfalls were highlighted as part of satisfaction surveys or staff meetings these were not always followed up in a timely way.

25 July 2013

During a routine inspection

When we carried out our inspection the service provided personal care for 32 adults in their own home. We spoke with one of the provider's and staff working at the agency office. Following our inspection we spoke with five people who used the service on the telephone. We also spoke with four relatives or partners of people who used the service. In addition we spoke with three members of staff who visited people to provide care.

People we spoke with were complimentary about the care and support provided. People said: 'All very efficient', 'Carers are excellent. All so kind hearted' and: 'Couldn't do without them'. One person who used the service described the carers as: 'Golden' and: 'My angels'.

We found that staff knew about the needs of the people they were caring for. We looked at the care records for three people. In places they lacked guidance for staff on how people's needs were to be met. However, people who used the service confirmed to us that they were receiving the care they needed.

Systems were in place to keep people safe. Staff had information available to them on how to report concerns or abuse. Staff received training and support to make sure they were able to provide appropriate care.

The provider had systems of audits in place to enable them to monitor the quality of the service. One of the providers was aware of where improvements in the service were needed and told us of the action taken to address these shortfalls.

5 November 2012

During a routine inspection

At the time of our inspection we were informed that 27 people were using the service. We spoke with three people who used the agency and one relative. We also spoke with four care workers, the deputy manager and two of the providers.

We found that people were able to express their views and had been involved in making decisions about their care and support.

People were complimentary about the care they had received. Comments included, 'Excellent', '100% very good', 'A band of angels' and 'They're lovely I'm more than pleased, they are perfect.'

We found that care workers had a good understanding of the needs of people they supported and cared for.

People working at the agency lacked knowledge about safeguarding procedures and the actions they would take to make sure other agencies were make aware of any incidents that had occurred.

Systems were in place to assess and monitor the quality of care provided and as a means to identify any improvements needed.