The Care Quality Commission
  • Services in your home
  • Homecare service

Archived: Glossop Office (DCC Homecare Service)

Talbot Street, Social Services Office, Glossop, High Peak, Derbyshire, SK13 8AY (01629) 532001

Provided and run by:
Derbyshire County Council

Important: This service is now registered at a different address - see new profile

All Inspections

14 February 2014

During a routine inspection

We asked and expert by experience to contact a number of people using the service and care staff by telephone. An expert by experience is a person employed by the Care Quality Commission (CQC) that has used or had a close relative that has used similar services in the past.

A person using the service told us, 'When I first came out of hospital I couldn't cope. I needed all of them [care staff] and they have given me the confidence to carry on.' Another person said, 'They [the care staff] are wonderful ground staff and part of my daily life.' Another person using the service said, 'I can find no problems with them at all'.

Not all of the people we spoke with were complimentary about the service, but these comments were very much in the minority. One partner of a service user said, 'I never know when they are coming. They do send out a [staff] rota of who should be coming but that's not always accurate.' People that made derogatory comments were contacted again by the Inspector. All those contacted were satisfied they had raised their concerns directly with the staff at the office, and were satisfied with the service. Another said, 'They are friendly and we have a laugh. It really bucks up [named person] when they are here. Without doubt I get value for money.'

People confirmed that they had been involved in decisions about their care and that care staff had treated them with respect.

We found that care plans are in place, and included risk assessments, and we found that people felt safe whilst being visited by staff.

We found the provider contacted people using the service, to ensure they were happy with the quality of the service.

18 December 2012

During a routine inspection

We spoke with people who received support from D.C.C. Homecare (Glossop) and managers and staff at the service. We also examined records and staff files. People told us that the service met their needs. One person told us, "They treat me with respect. I would give them 10 out of 10 for everything." Another person said about the staff, "They are marvellous."

Although people were happy with the care that they received from D.C.C. Homecare (Glossop), we found that systems for care planning and risk assessment did not fully ensure their safety and welfare. This was because areas of risk, for example regarding people's health conditions were not assessed and that guidance for staff was not always detailed and personalised.

We saw that the service recruited the right staff using appropriate procedures and that they dealt effectively with any complaints or concerns.

We found that consent was not always being obtained for people's care and that proper procedures were not used to assess the capacity of people who may not be able to consent for themselves.

We also found although assessments were completed about how people should be supported with their medication, people receiving care and support from D.C.C. Homecare (Glossop) were not always fully protected from risks associated with unsafe use of medication.

7 November 2011

During a routine inspection

As part of this inspection we spoke by telephone to 10 people who were supported by the Homecare Service and saw groups of staff at every locality office. We also spoke with organisation's operational managers and Domiciliary Service Organisers (DSO) at the locality offices and senior officers at the Adult Social Care Department's headquarters; they all gave us a perspective about their work.

All of the people we spoke to expressed very positive relations with the staff who provided support and care, and good relations with the agency's office based coordinator and management staff. They told us that staff worked sensitively and carefully and 'they're very good with what they do. They've all been properly trained, are very skilful and work carefully and thoughtfully at all times', that 'they're all good and one male worker is particularly so. They are definitely aware of the need to respect privacy and dignity' and that 'they're all lovely with my mum, I couldn't fault them'. We were also told about the flexibility of the arrangements being made and how the agency was responsive to requests to change things.

Staff told us that 'it's all about people's independence and respect for them as individuals and respect for their privacy and dignity', and that 'we have to be professional and, because of the new ways of working the service has evolved into something completely different'.

Patterns of care delivery worked well for the people being supported. A very small number commented on the high numbers of staff supporting them but not that this was a particular problem. Nobody expressed any major concerns with the timekeeping aspects of the service.

People told us in general terms about their confidence in the agency's staff to work safely and the staff that we spoke to all told us that they had received proper training about abuse of vulnerable people and they demonstrated an understanding about their responsibilities to report any concerns.