You are here

Poppy's Homecare Limited Outstanding

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 3 March 2017

Poppy’s Homecare Limited provides care and support to mostly older people, who live in their own homes. The services provided include personal care and domestic work for people living in Weston-super-Mare, Winscombe, Congresbury, Backwell, Nailsea and the surrounding areas.

The service 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.

We visited the office on 9 January 2017. We carried out phone calls to people who used the service, their relatives, and healthcare professionals between 12 January and 23 January 2017. At the time of this announced inspection 64 people were receiving personal care from the service. The service met all of our regulations at the previous inspection in January 2014.

People benefited from a management team who had clear visions and values about how the service was to be delivered. People and their relatives were keen to tell us about the management and consistently high standards of care they received from Poppy’s. Comments included “I can’t speak highly enough of them; Poppy’s are definitely the best”; “They’re the high end of care”; and “I always have outstanding responses.” Professionals who were involved with the service said “They’re brilliant. If I had to choose an agency I can honestly say I would recommend Poppy’s”; “Poppy’s are always top of my list; they’re where they need to be” and “They have a very good reputation.”

People were supported by a strong, stable staff team who knew them well and focused on ensuring they received the highest quality of care. Without exception people and relatives all spoke very highly of the staff who cared for and supported them. Comments included “The carers are excellent; we wouldn’t get by without them”; It lifts my day when the carers come in”; “They’ve almost become part of the family”; “The carers really connect with mum” and “very friendly, helpful, cheerful and they do everything they possibly can.” The registered manager and staff gave us many examples of how they went ‘the extra mile’ for people and the difference this had made for them. For example, staff had supported one person to order a new motability car because they knew how important it was to them to go out. Staff were highly motivated and had gone out of their way to support people in their own time.

People were involved in developing and running the service. For example, people were asked for feedback on staff’s performance through reviews and an annual survey. The survey carried out in 2016 was completed by 41 people and 5 relatives. People and their relatives showed 98% satisfaction overall. In response to the findings the provider had taken action. For example, one person said they would like their visit record in large print. We spoke with the person and they told us they now received a large print rota and it was so much better.

People and their relatives were involved in their care and staff respected people’s wishes. People’s care plans were personalised and included information about how they liked things to be done. People told us staff gained consent before carrying out personal care and respected their choices. People told us they liked to be independent and staff respected this, offering help when needed. Staff said “It’s about enabling the person to live an independent and fulfilled life”.

Staff had an in-depth appreciation of people’s individual needs around privacy and dignity. A health professional commented “They treat people with total respect, it’s so nice.” Dignity was high on the agenda and the management team had made improvements to embed the principles in people’s care and support. One person told us “They are very polite, very respectful and don’t overstep any boundaries.” Staff told us “We consider every aspect of equality, it’s always about them. It’s all geared around choices.”

The service was flexible. People told us office staff always listened to them and they had been able to change times to meet their needs. This meant people were able to attend events and appointments, as well as enabling them to follow their interests. People were able to make decisions in relation to their daily activities. We heard of staff supporting people with activities such as walks, shopping, the cinema, the garden centre, sporting events, and attending therapy. One relative said “It’s so important (name) keeps doing activities” and staff who supported this person knew this was important to them. Care plans contained people’s interests and activities they enjoyed.

People benefited from effective care because staff were trained and supported to meet their needs. People said “They’re all very good” and “They know what they’re doing.” Staff told us they were happy with their training. Comments included “I have experience in a number of care settings, and this was the most intensive and best training I’ve had”; and “The training is top notch.” Reflective learning questions were used after training to check staff had the knowledge they needed. Staff told us they felt well supported and had regular opportunities to discuss their work. Staff said “I absolutely love it. There’s nothing we can’t talk about”; “They look after us, and we look after our clients”; “This is the best care company, I’m proud to put my name to it”; and “They’re a really nice company to work for, I’ll be here until I need care.”

The management team found ways to show staff they were valued and appreciated. Three staff had recently been presented with long service awards. They had all worked for Poppy’s for ten years. The registered manager had looked for creative ways of communicating with care staff to make sure they knew about changes and kept up-to-date with best practice. For example, staff meetings were held on different days so that all staff had the opportunity to attend and contribute to the development of the service. Staff told us “They’re always sending out updates” and “We’re always talking about how to make things better for people.”

The registered manager worked with other organisations to make sure they followed current best practice and provided a high quality service. For example, one of the company directors was a facilitator for the Best Practice in Dementia Care Learning Programme at the University of Stirling. The registered manager accessed professional websites, subscribed to a range of health and social care magazines, and attended local forums. They were also a member of the United Kingdom Home Care Association (UKHCA).

People told us they felt safe and comfortable when staff were in their home and when they received care. One person said “I’d trust the girls with my life.” Another person had fed back to the provider that they were confident they were in good hands if there was an emergency. Staff knew how to recognise signs of potential abuse and understood how to report any concerns in line with the service's safeguarding policy. Safe staff recruitment procedures were in place. This helped reduce the risk of the provider employing a person who may be a risk to people.

People told us staff were usually on time and had time to meet their needs in the way they wanted. People were provided with visit record so they knew which staff would be visiting them. Staff told us they tried to ring people with any changes, and the majority of people confirmed this happened.

Risk assessments had been undertaken for each person. These included information about action to be taken to minimise the chance of harm occurring to people. We saw risk assessments had been carried out in relation to mobility, nutrition, epilepsy, medication, and skin care. Risk assessments relating to each person's home environment had been completed. Staff identified when people were not safe and raised concerns. We received feedback from an occupational therapist who said “I have spoken to the senior carers a number of times when they have identified manual handling risks to the patient and their carers.”

People were supported safely with their medicines and they told us they were happy with the support they received. Staff completed medication administration record sheets to confirm people had been given their medicines. Staff had completed medicines training and were observed administering medicines to check they were competent. Senior staff checked medicines were being administered correctly during checks carried out in people's homes.

People and their relatives felt able to raise concerns or make a complaint. They were confident their concerns would be taken seriously. People told us they didn't have any complaints. Where complaints had been received they had been managed in line with the company policy. Where there were some ongoing issues with a complex package of care, the management team held monthly meetings with the person. This was to review what had happened and look for different ways of doing things when needed.

An audit system was in place to monitor the quality of the service people received. Information could be quickly updated on the provider’s electronic system which meant staff were able to monitor what was happening for people. Records were clear, well organised and up-to-date. Unannounced checks to observe staff’s competency were carried out on a regular basis.

Inspection areas



Updated 3 March 2017

The service was safe.

People were protected from risks to their health and wellbeing because staff took action when issues were identified.

People were protected from the risk of abuse through the provision of policies, procedures and staff training.

Safe and robust staff recruitment procedures helped to ensure that people received their support from suitable staff.



Updated 3 March 2017

The service was effective.

People benefited from having staff who were skilled and supported in their job role.

People were supported by staff who were trained in the mental capacity act and understood the need for consent.

People were supported by staff who sought advice from health care services to ensure their needs were met.



Updated 3 March 2017

The service was very caring.

People's feedback was overwhelmingly positive. People were cared for by staff who went ‘the extra mile’ for them.

People benefited from staff who took time to listen to them and get to know them. Staff had formed strong caring relationships with people.

People and their relatives were involved in their care and staff respected people’s wishes.

People benefited from staff who promoted their independence and encouraged them to do as much for themselves as possible.



Updated 3 March 2017

The service was responsive.

People received personalised care because care plans described what staff needed to do to support people well.

People benefited from a staff team who supported them to follow their interests and take part in their chosen activities

People were encouraged to give their views and raise concerns and complaints if the need arose.



Updated 3 March 2017

The service was very well-led.

People benefited from a provider who had a strong commitment to delivering the highest quality of care.

People and staff benefited from strong leadership. The management team had clear visions and values about how the service was to be delivered and these were shared with the staff team.

People benefited from a provider who involved them in the running of the service and used their feedback to drive improvements. The provider was continually striving to improve whilst putting people at the heart of the service.