• Services in your home
  • Homecare service

Archived: Lifeline Homecare Glastonbury Office

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

65 High Street, Glastonbury, Somerset, BA6 9DS (01458) 832692

Provided and run by:
Lifeline Homecare Limited

All Inspections

10 May 2016

During a routine inspection

This inspection was announced and took place on 10, 18 May 2016. We also made telephone calls to people on 23 May 2016.

Lifeline Glastonbury is a home care agency, which provides personal care to people living in Glastonbury, Wells, Shepton Mallett and surrounding area. At the time of our inspection there were 75 people receiving support from the agency.

The agency had a registered manager. 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.’

People spoke of receiving a safe service. The service identified potential risks to people’s health and welfare and took actions to minimise those risks.

One person told us “I can find no faults with the service and trust the carers.”

Staff demonstrated an understanding of how to identify and protect people from abuse. They were confident in reporting any concerns and their manager responding positively. The registered manager had acted professionally in responding to concerns about possible abuse.

People received care from a team of between two to six regular care workers dependant on the visits they received. All of the people we spoke with confirmed how they received the same care workers. One person told us, “I always know who is coming and I always know them and they know me that is one of the good things.”

People received the care they expected and at the time they expected. This was assured through having a call monitoring system that provided evidence of the length of time care workers stayed in people’s homes providing care.

The agency undertook recruitment checks to ensure people were of good character and suitable to work with vulnerable people.

Where people required support or assistance with medicines this was provided in a safe way by trained staff.

People told us they felt care works knew what to do and were confident in providing support and care. One person said, “They always appear well trained in what they do.” Staff reported receiving “Very good training.” However some staff said they would benefit from training about specific physical conditions such as multiple sclerosis and strokes.

The agency had involved specialists and community nurses in providing training so care workers could meet people’s needs safely and effectively.

People’s preferences particularly regarding having a male or only female care workers were respected.

The agency met the required of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 through ensuring people, where able, consented to their care arrangements and people’s rights were protected because the correct procedures were followed whey they lacked capacity to make decisions.

People were treated with respect and described care workers as “Caring and kind,” and Very courteous and helpful.” and “Go above and beyond”. A relative said how the service was provided with “Care and compassion.”

People had the opportunity to review their care arrangements and make any changes which were needed. One person said, “It is all very good if I need anything different I just have to say.” Staff identified where people had particular needs for example related to their health and responded to those needs to ensure they were addressed.

People needs were assessed before starting to receive a service to ensure the agency could be responsive and effective in meeting needs.

Care plans provided a person centred approach to supporting people. People’s differences and diversity were recognised and care tailored to people’s specific needs.

The service promoted a culture whereby people were enabled to voice any concerns informally or through the agencies complaints procedure and be confident they would be heard.

There were arrangements to monitor and audit the quality of the service and make improvements and learn from incidents and concerns to improve practice.

People benefitted from a culture that promoted respect and the need to provide a compassionate and caring service.

12 February 2014

During a routine inspection

There were 75 people who use the service on the day of our visit. We visited four people who use the service and spoke with another four people on the telephone. We also saw two support plans in people’s homes and eight more in the office. We spoke with four members of staff. One person we spoke with said “I’m absolutely delighted with the service” and that they received “outstanding care”. Staff we spoke with said “we always read the care plan; it’s got everything we need”.

People we spoke with said “I’m always asked during regular reviews if anything needs changing” and “I’m always asked if anything else is needed”. One person said “I’m very impressed with their ability”. Staff told us that they knew people and their specific needs “100%” and “incredibly well”.

Most of the people who use the service only needed to be prompted to take their medication. People told us “staff know what they’re doing when they help with medicines” and “staff tell me what I’m having”.

One person told us that the service was “well organised” and provided “peace of mind”. One person said it was a “very good service” and that “some staff go the extra mile”. People we spoke with said that their opinions were listened to; one person said “I’m quite happy” and another said “I get on very well with them”.

21, 22 February 2013

During a routine inspection

We spoke with five people who used the service in their own homes and four on the telephone, and we also spoke with three relatives. This enabled us to a gain a view of how the service was run. We read five care plans which included information for staff on how to care for the individual to meet their needs. We also spoke with five members of the care team.

People who used the service, and their relatives, told us they were very happy with the service provided. One person said 'this is best agency we have been with, they are the most reliable and have good standards'. Another person said 'carers show respect for privacy and dignity, they have the right skills and knowledge to meet my needs'. Another person commented 'I feel safe and comfortable around carers, I can raise concerns'.

People told us they could choose how their care was delivered. People received regular reviews from care staff to ensure their needs were met and they were receiving safe care.

Staff were trained to ensure they provided an appropriate standard of care to people. Staff knew how to recognise signs of abuse and how to report it internally. The service was monitored to ensure risks to people's health and welfare were managed effectively.