We carried out a review of the data available to us about Community Lifeline 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 Community Lifeline, you can give feedback on this service.
Community Lifeline is a domiciliary care agency providing personal care to people living in their own homes. People had varying needs, some people were living with dementia, some people had a learning disability, or had physical conditions such as recovering from a stroke. 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. The service was supporting approximately 38 people with their personal care at the time of inspection.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People told us they felt safe with staff and were confident they were well trained and knew how to provide their care and support. One person described how this was planned, “We talk about the things I need help with, so I don't hurt myself and it is written down. The carer helps me to do things carefully and safely and I feel looked after well.” People said there were enough staff as their care was never cancelled and staff always made sure they stayed the full length of time when visiting.
People were supported to access healthcare advice and assistance with their nutrition and hydration when this was needed. People and their relatives told us they were involved in and directed their care, making their own choices and decisions. One person told us, “I still have my independence to choose and make decisions about how I want to live, and they help me keep organised to do this.”
People and their relatives were overwhelmingly positive about the staff supporting them, describing them as caring and kind. One person said, “They are kind and they care. I have two different carers during the week and they are both caring and respectful."
People had the information they needed to make a complaint if they needed to and any complaints made were investigated and followed up. People and staff described a management team who were approachable and listened to what they had to say. There was a clear open and person-centred culture where people and staff felt supported.
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.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection
The last rating for this service was Good (Report published 25 November 2016)
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.
There was a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC). 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.
People felt safe and were supported by staff who knew how to keep them safe and understood their responsibilities to protect people from the risk of harm. Risks to people’s health and safety were managed. Plans in place to identify and reduce the risk to people’s safety contained sufficient detail to inform staff how they should minimise the risks. There were sufficient numbers of staff to meet people’s care needs and staff were recruited safely. People received the level of support they required to safely manage their medicines.
People were supported by staff who received appropriate induction, training, supervision and a yearly appraisal. Staff were fully supported by management. People’s rights were protected under the Mental Capacity Act 2005. People received the assistance they required to have enough to eat and drink. External professionals were involved in people’s care as appropriate.
People were treated with kindness and compassion by the staff. People reported positive and caring relationships had been developed between themselves and the staff. People felt able to contribute to decisions about their care and were involved in the planning and reviewing of their care and how they wanted their care delivered. People were treated with dignity and respect by staff who understood the importance of this.
People received the care they needed and staff were aware of the support each person required. Care records were written in a person-centred way that focused on people’s wishes and respected their views. Care plans provided information for staff so people could receive personalised care. A complaints process was in place, and people felt able to make a complaint and felt staff would respond in a timely manner.
The service promoted a positive culture that was person-centred, inclusive and open. People and their relatives described communication with the service as good. Staff felt supported by the management. All staff felt the registered manager was approachable and listened to their views or concerns. People were encouraged to share their experience about the service and feedback on those experiences. There were a number of quality assurance processes in place that regularly assessed the quality and effectiveness of the support provided.
People told us they were treated well by the staff and one person said, “The staff are all friendly and treat me very well; they cannot do enough for me!”
One relative who told us “We were involved in planning and agreeing the care plan for my relative and we have been pleased with the service provided.”
Staff told us they were supported through supervision and regular staff meetings and this enabled them to provide a good quality service to the people who use the service.
The people who use the service were complimentary about the provider and the quality of care they received and the professionalism of care staff. One person told us, “I am very happy with the service I receive, all the staff are professional in their approach, and are able to support my needs.”
People we spoke to told us they were happy with the service and the way they or their relative were supported. They told us that the staff knew how to support them and said staff always talked with them when giving them support, telling them what was going on.
We found that people had care plans and risk assessments in place which described their individual support needs.
We saw training records that showed staff were well trained and supervised. We saw that staff had received training in safeguarding vulnerable people, and demonstrated to us their knowledge of how to keep people safe.
The provider had systems in place to monitor the quality of the service.