Archived: Celtic Care

People told us, “I am lucky they (staff) also look after my well being,” “They (staff) are good as gold, always friendly and very very good to me” and “They have a super reputation, no problems at all”.

People were treated with respect by staff. People were asked how they wished their care to be provided. Staff respected people’s wishes. For example, people were asked what they wished staff to prepare for their meal and what clothes they wished to wear.

Staff had received training in how to recognise and report abuse. Staff were confident about how to report any concerns and were confident that any allegations made would be fully investigated to help ensure people were protected. There were sufficient numbers of suitably qualified staff to meet the needs of people who used the service. The service was flexible and responded to people’s changing needs. However, the service had vacant positions for one full time and one part time carer at the time of this inspection. These vacancies were being covered by existing staff.

People received care from staff who knew them well, and had the knowledge and skills to meet their needs. People and their relatives spoke well of staff. People told us, “Oh gosh, they are all trained up” and “ I know they all go for training.”

Staff were knowledgeable about the people they cared for and knew how to recognise if people’s needs changed. Staff were aware of people’s preferences and interests, as well as their health and support needs, which enabled them to provide a personalised service. Staff were kind and compassionate and treated people with dignity and respect.

The management and staff had a clear understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and how to make sure people who did not have the mental capacity to make decisions for themselves had their legal rights protected.

People had care plans held both at the office of the service and in their own homes. Care plans contained information to direct staff on how to care for each person according to their needs and wishes. Regular reviews took place to ensure staff were aware of any changes in people’s care needs. Information about any changes was communicated to staff via text message or telephone call. However, some changes were not always recorded in the care plan in a timely manner. The provider assured us that this issue would be addressed immediately.

Staff were recruited safely to help ensure they were suitable to work unsupervised with vulnerable people in their own homes. Staff received regular supervision meetings with senior management. Annual appraisals were also carried out. This provided staff with an opportunity to discuss any training needs or professional development needed.

Staff were happy working for Celtic Care. The registered manager and assistant manager were clearly committed to providing a good service for people often going the extra mile for people who did not have anyone to assist them other than care staff. For example, arranging for repairs to be carried out in their homes and purchasing items on their behalf. People told us, “They always do more for you if you need help” and “They once nipped to the local shop for me and came back in 30 minutes because they were concerned that I might not be able to do it.”

People told us, “The staff are always on time, absolutely brilliant I can’t fault them,” “They’re always in uniform, they fold my clothes, bring down my dirty ones and leave the bathroom exactly as they find it” and “No problems, they are efficient, they fill in all the books and come and collect the time sheets once a month.”

Staff told us there was good communication with the management of the service. Staff told us, “We get good support,” “They (management) make time for you” and “They (management) are very supportive and very helpful whenever you need it.”

There were effective quality assurance systems in place to make sure that any areas for improvement were identified and addressed. The provider and assistant manager visited people in their homes regularly to check on their experiences of the service provided to them. A survey completed by 52 people and their families was overall positive about the care and support provided. People, and their families where appropriate, were provided with information on how to raise any concerns they may have. The service had not had any concerns raised at the time of this inspection. Compliments were received from grateful and happy people and their families thanking the service for their kind care and support. People commented, “Lovely ladies, lovely people”, “ very professional” and “ We sometimes drop them notes of appreciation”.

This report only covers our findings in relation to the question ‘is the service effective?’. You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Celtic Care on our website at www.cqc.org.uk

Celtic Care is a community service that provides care and support to adults of all ages, in their own homes. The service provides help with people’s personal care needs in the Falmouth area.

At the time of this inspection visit Celtic care was providing care for 27 people. There were 17 staff employed by the service.

There was a registered manager in post. 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 held a record of all the training undertaken by staff and when they were due for updates. The assistant manager held a record of each time staff had supervision and appraisals. This meant that the service had a robust process with which to monitor the training and supervision needs of all staff.

The registered manager and assistant manager met with all the care staff in person each week when they came in to the office to collect their rota. There were also regular staff meetings and memos sent out to communicate information relating to people receiving a service and any changes. This meant that there were effective processes for communicating with all the staff.

At this focused inspection we found the registered provider had taken effective action to meet the requirements of the regulations and the breach had been met.

This was a routine inspection to check that essential standards of quality and safety were being met. We sometimes describe this as a scheduled inspection. .

We looked at the personal care or treatment records of people who used the service, telephoned three people who received a service to check with them that they were satisfied with the care they received from the agency at each stage of their treatment. We also spoke with the provider of the agency and three members of staff.

We spoke with three people who used the service, contacted by telephone three relatives in the community and one relative who arrived at the provider's office to discuss further the care needs of their mother. We also spoke with three care workers and the provider who was also the registered manager. The three people we spoke with told us that the agency kept them informed and enabled them to make choices concerning their care and participate in the process, thereby maintaining their independence.

We looked at four people's care and treatment records and the evidence provided showed us that the needs of the people lie at the heart of the provision of personal care and treatment. Records, discussion with people using the service and staff evidenced that the service was managed at all times in a way which, met the individual needs of the person receiving care, as specified in the care plan and respected the rights, privacy and dignity of the individual.

We looked at the personnel records of three care workers. We found that recruitment checks were made to ensure that staff were suitable to work with vulnerable people. The three staff we spoke with confirmed that management had contacted them on receipt of all required documentation including a Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) clearance certificate. The clearance certificate meant that staff were police checked and had no current recorded or spent convictions.

We spoke with three staff who said that they received a structured induction process from the provider who organised all training in-house. We looked at their training files which confirmed this. The people we spoke with confirmed that staff were appropriately trained to meet their personal care needs.

We looked at the policies and procedures and noted that people's rights, health and best interests are safeguarded by policies and procedures.

People told us about, and we saw evidence of pre-care assessments of peoples' needs to ensure the agency could provide the required level of care. The care plans we looked at were sufficiently detailed to direct and inform staff as to how care was to be provided. We saw evidence of regular reviews of care to ensure the care provided took account of any changes that had occurred.

People experienced effective, safe and appropriate care and support that met their needs and protected their rights.

People were protected from abuse, or the risk of abuse, and their human rights were respected and upheld.

People who used the service had a good understanding of the fees they were asked to pay. People knew how much, when and how to pay.

The agency had effective recruitment and selection procedures in place.