We carried out a review of the data available to us about Homelife Care Limited Crowborough on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Homelife Care Limited Crowborough, you can give feedback on this service.
Homelife Care Limited Crowborough is a homecare agency providing hourly support to people within their own homes. At the time of the inspection 68 people were receiving personal care.
Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also consider any wider social care provided.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People told us they felt safe with staff and received care at the times they expected to. Staff were knowledgeable about how to reduce risks and how to respond if they suspected any abuse occurred. People received their medicines safely and staff followed best practice in relation to infection control.
People received an assessment before they received care and staff worked alongside healthcare professionals, changes in people’s health were shared with healthcare professionals in a timely manner. People told us staff prepared foods for them in line with their preferences and dietary needs and people had care plans in place for nutrition. 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’s feedback about staff was positive and we saw examples of staff taking action to promote people’s wellbeing and make them feel good. Care was delivered in a way that encouraged people to be independent and staff were knowledgeable about how to do this. People said staff were respectful when entering their homes and they received care in a dignified way.
Care was planned and delivered in a personalised way and care plans were frequently reviewed. People were supported to engage in activities in their communities and staff found ways to reduce isolation for people. People knew how to complain, and any issues raised with the provider had been logged and responded to.
People and staff spoke positively about the management of the service. There were systems in place to monitor and assure the quality of the care people received. Staff were recognised for good practice and there were systems to ensure important information was communicated to staff. The service worked with external agencies to ensure people received holistic care.
Rating at last inspection
The last rating for this service was Good (published 17 January 2017)
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.
Homelife Care Limited Crowborough is registered as a domiciliary care agency, providing personal care to people in their own homes in the community. They provide services to any people who need care and support. The agency provides care services mainly to people living within a ten mile radius of their office in Crowborough. There were approximately 114 people receiving support to meet their personal care needs on the day we inspected.
There was a registered manager based at the 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 service was run by two providers who were fully involved in the day to day running of the service. The registered manager was also one of the providers.
People felt safe when receiving their support from Homelife Care Limited and knew who to contact if they had any worries about their safety. Staff had a good knowledge of how to safeguard vulnerable adults from abuse and knew what their responsibilities were within their role. They knew who to report their concerns to both inside and outside of the organisation.
Risks to individual people and their circumstances had been identified, with actions put in place to reduce the risk and maintain people’s safety. People’s home environment, inside and outside, had been checked for hazards before their support commenced, helping to keep people and staff safe. Most people did not need help from staff to take their medicines, as they managed this themselves or family and friends helped, however some people did. Staff had the training necessary to equip them with the skills to safely administer medicines to people.
The providers had robust recruitment processes in place to make sure new staff were suitable to work with vulnerable people in their own homes. Enough staff were available to be able to run an effective service, responsive to people’s needs. People told us that staff were always on time when visiting and always stayed to support them for the whole time they were allocated. Staff had suitable training at induction when they were new as well as regular updates. Most of the training was by DVD's although the registered manager allocated time on the rota for groups of staff to go into the office to undertake their training. Additional training was available to make sure staff were skilled and confident to cater for specialist needs, such as to support people living with dementia. Staff had ‘spot checks’ to make sure their practice continued to be safe and of good quality as well as one to one supervision.
Although most people looked after their own health care needs or had a family member who helped with this, staff supported people who needed assistance when requiring health care appointments or advice.
People told us they made their own decisions and choices and staff were clear that people were in control of their care and support. Mental capacity assessments had been undertaken where appropriate following the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. People’s families were often involved if their loved ones needed support to make decisions and family members told us this.
The caring approach of staff was evidenced, people were very positive about the staff who supported them, some describing them as friends they looked forward to seeing. Most people had regular staff providing their care and support who had got to know them well, creating confidence and trust. People were given a service user guide at the commencement of their care and support with the information they would need about the service they should expect.
A member of the management team undertook an initial assessment of people’s personal care needs so the registered manager could be sure they had the resources available to support people. People had a care plan that detailed the individual support people required as a guide for staff. People, and their families if appropriate, were involved in the process to ensure the support in the care plan expressed how they wanted their care and support to be undertaken. Regular reviews of the care plan took place with the involvement of people and their family members.
How to make a complaint was included in the service user guide, and the people we spoke to knew how to make a complaint if they needed to. The provider asked people for their views of the service by asking them to complete a questionnaire once a year. The registered manager also checked that people were happy with their support when they regularly visited to undertake reviews.
All the people we spoke to and their relatives thought the service was well run. People and their relatives knew the provider and registered manager by name and were very complimentary about them both, saying they were happy to speak to them and always got a response.
Staff were happy with the support available for them and said that suggestions or concerns were responded to quickly. They found the registered manager and provider very approachable and would be happy to raise any concerns with them, confident they would be acted upon.
The provider had a quality monitoring system in place to make sure the service provided remained safe and of good quality. They were looking to improve their system to suit their needs better in order to ensure they were responsive to making necessary improvements in the future. A range of auditing processes were undertaken at various intervals. People were asked their views of the service and the registered manager acted on the feedback provided to improve the quality of support to people.
People told us they had been involved in the assessment and planning of their care and its regular review. They said they were listened to, their preferences taken into account and any changes in their needs were addressed quickly. One person told us 'They are professional, obliging and flexible'. A relative said 'We are happy with the care. They do things the way our relative likes and always keep us well informed'.
They told us they were treated with respect and were satisfied with their care and support which was as described in their care plans. One person said 'They start my day so well. I couldn't be happier' and a relative said 'The care is wonderful. Our relative is not a service user to the staff but a real person and they understand their needs very well'.
Most people's medicines were supplied through the monitored dosage system and they were supported to receive them safely by appropriately trained staff.
The recruitment process in place ensured that all staff had appropriate checks before starting work and had undertaken the relevant training.
The provider had systems in place to assess and monitor the quality of care and support people received. Feedback from people using the service was sought and they were responsive when issues or concerns were raised.
We spoke with nine people who used the service, all of whom were complimentary. One person told us they 'had the highest regard for the workers'. Another person said the staff were 'wonderful, efficient and amusing'. One person told us the staff were 'a nice bunch of calm people'.
People told us they were included in the planning of their care. One person told us they were 'always happy to answer questions when things arose'. Another person told us 'they are much better then the other company we were with'.
Staff we spoke with were caring and responded to people's needs. Staff told us they felt supported by the agency and received regular, quality training.
Staff were knowledegable about keeping people safe. People told us they felt safe and confident to talk to staff if they had any concerns.