We carried out a review of the data available to us about Violets Homecare Services Limited 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 Violets Homecare Services Limited, you can give feedback on this service.
Violets Homecare Services Limited is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats in the community. It provides a service to older people who may live with sensory or physical disabilities, dementia, mental illness or learning disabilities. At the time of this inspection 87 people were using the service.
Not everyone using Violets Homecare Services Limited receives the regulated activity; CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also consider any wider social care provided.
At our last inspection in June 2016 we rated the service as good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.
Staff had been trained about safeguarding people from avoidable harm and were knowledgeable about the potential risks and signs of abuse. Risks to people’s safety and wellbeing were assessed and managed in the least restrictive way possible. Enough staff were available to meet people’s needs. People were supported to take their medicines safely. Staff had received training in infection control practices and personal protective equipment was provided for them. The management used incidents as a learning tool to help further ensure people’s safety and wellbeing.
Staff received training and supervision to enable them to meet people’s care and support needs. The service worked within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff support them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service support this practice. People were supported to eat and drink sufficient amounts to maintain their health and wellbeing. The staff and management team worked in partnership with external professionals and families to help ensure people’s needs were identified and met.
People had a stable team of staff to support them which helped to ensure continuity and enabled people to form bonds with the staff. Staff understood the importance of promoting people’s independence and respecting their dignity. People's care records were stored securely to help maintain their dignity and confidentiality.
People had been involved in developing care plans that addressed all areas of their lives. The provider and registered manager had appropriate and robust processes in place to manage concerns or complaints.
The registered manager and provider undertook a range of routine checks which were effective in identifying shortfalls. The registered manager was committed to providing good care and support and demonstrated an in-depth knowledge of the staff they employed and people who used the service.
The inspection was announced and took place on 7 and 9 June 2016.
The service had 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
People were kept safe by staff that had a good understanding of how to identify abuse, and knew how to respond appropriately to any concerns that arose. Risks to people’s safety had been assessed so as to minimise the potential for reoccurrence, and had been measured against people’s right to take risks and remain independent.
Staff numbers were based upon the amount of care that people required, and were flexible to ensure that people were kept safe. Robust recruitment procedures ensured that only staff who were considered suitable to support people worked within the service.
Safe systems were in place to ensure that people received their medication in line with their prescriptions. Staff ensured that medication was administered and recorded in accordance with best practice guidelines.
An induction programme was in place for new staff which prepared them suitably for their role and assessed their competencies against essential standards. Staff were also provided with a range of training to help them to carry out their roles and meet people’s needs. Regular supervision and annual appraisals, to further support and develop staff were also provided.
Staff complied with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the associated Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). Wherever possible people were actively involved in decision about their care and support needs.
People were supported to take an adequate dietary intake, based upon their specific dietary needs, if this was an assessed part of their care package. Liaison with healthcare professionals took place when needed and prompt action was taken in response to illness or changes in people’s physical and mental health.
Staff treated people in a friendly and caring manner, with kindness and compassion, and cared for them according to their individual needs. They had a good understanding of people’s individual needs and worked hard to ensure they had choices based upon their personal preferences.
Staff were very knowledgeable about the specific needs of the people they supported and used this information to ensure that people received person centred care, which ensured their privacy and dignity was maintained.
People's needs were assessed prior to them being provided with care and support. Care plans were updated on a regular basis, or as and when people's care needs changed. People knew how to make a complaint if they needed to and were confident that the service would listen to them. Where action was required to be taken to address complaints, we found that lessons were learnt from this to drive future improvement.
The registered manager was visible and accessible and staff and people had confidence in the way the service was run. The culture within the service was forward thinking, open and positive, with all staff striving to provide the best care and support they could. The registered manager and provider regularly assessed and monitored the quality of care provided to people so that they could drive future improvement and make changes for the better. Staff were encouraged to contribute to the development of the service and understood the provider’s visions and values.
We noted from the five care files that we looked at, that people were offered support at a level which encouraged independence and ensured that their individual needs were met. People told us that the staff were friendly and courteous in their approach and were knowledgeable and confident in their roles. One person told us, "They're all wonderful, I have no grumbles at all, they'll do anything to help".
We could see from records that people were encouraged to express their views and were involved in planning their care and making decisions about their care and support. The provider welcomed suggestions from people which could improve the service they provided. People told us they felt able to approach the office staff or the manager to discuss anything, and they were confident that swift action would be taken to resolve any issues they had.