Goldsmith Personnel Limited

Goldsmith Personnel Limited is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats in the community. Not everyone using Goldsmith Personnel Limited receives 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 take into account any wider social care provided. At the time of the inspection it was providing a service to 90 people.

There was a registered manager at the service at the time of our inspection. 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 told us they felt the service was safe, staff were kind and the care received was good. We found staff had a good understanding of their responsibility with regard to safeguarding adults.

Risk assessments were in place which provided guidance on how to support people safely. There were sufficient numbers of suitable staff employed by the service. Staff had been recruited safely with appropriate checks on their backgrounds completed. Medicines were managed safely.

Staff undertook training and received regular supervision to help support them to provide effective care. Staff we spoke with had a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). MCA is legislation protecting people who are unable to make decisions for themselves. People and their relatives told us staffing treated them with dignity and respect.

Person centred support plans were in place and people and their relatives were involved in planning the care and support they received.

People’s cultural and religious needs were respected when planning and delivering care. Discussions with staff members showed that they respected people’s sexual orientation so that lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people could feel accepted and welcomed in the service.

The provider had a complaint procedure in place. People and their relatives knew how to make a complaint.

At the time of our inspection the service did not have any people receiving end of life care. The service had an end of life policy in policy. Staff received end of life care training.

Staff told us the registered manager was supportive. People and their relatives felt the service was well led and had a good relationship with office staff. The service had various quality assurance and monitoring mechanisms in place.

There was a registered manager at the service at the time of our inspection. 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 were not always protected from risks to their health and wellbeing because risk assessments to guide staff were inconsistent and did not always provide sufficient detail for staff about how to manage specific risks.

The provider followed the latest guidance and legal developments about obtaining consent to care. However, people had not always signed to consent to their care where they had transitioned from being a child who used the service to an adult using the service. Staff used a range of communication methods to support people to express their views about their care.

People felt safe and were protected from the risk of potential abuse. Staff were knowledgeable about safeguarding and knew what to do if they had concerns about the service. The staff were suitable to work in the caring profession and recruited appropriately.

Medicines were well managed and the service conducted regular audits of medicine administration.

Staff were trained to carry out their roles and newly appointed staff were supported in their role by a robust induction period.

People were supported to get enough to eat and drink and people had access to healthcare professionals.

There were enough staff to meet people’s needs and people consistently received care from the same care staff member. Staff developed caring relationships with people using the service and respected people’s diversity and privacy. People and their relatives were involved in planning their care and care records included information about people's likes and dislikes and promoting their independence.

There was a positive and open culture at the service. People using the service and their relatives felt confident that they could raise concerns and their complaints would be taken seriously.

We made three recommendations in relation fit and proper persons employed, consent and good governance. We found one breach of the Regulations around safe care and treatment. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.

We found at this inspection visit that the service could now demonstrate that staff received regular training and supervision, as well as annual appraisals. We saw that care workers and office staff also attended group meetings to discuss professional issues and share information.

We spoke with the office manager and two care co-ordinators about the training and support provided for staff, and we checked six staff files. We also looked at other relevant documents, such as the minutes for staff meetings.

People told us they were consulted about their care and involved in developing their support plans. We spoke with five care workers who all demonstrated their understanding of gaining people's consent to care.

We found that people's care needs were assessed and recorded in their care plans. Relevant risk assessments had been carried out to make sure people were cared for safely. People told us they felt safe with their care workers and the five care workers we spoke with all demonstrated an understanding of how they would protect vulnerable people from the risk of abuse.

The agency had appropriate recruitment policies and procedures to make sure that all necessary pre-employment checks were conducted. This meant that people using the service were cared for and supported by suitable staff. We saw that staff received supervision, but the agency could not demonstrate that staff were supported to meet people's needs through regular training and annual appraisals.

The service had procedures for monitoring the quality of services provided, to make sure people using Goldsmith Personnel Limited received the care and support they needed.

We also looked at staff recruitment practices, having received information from a safeguarding investigation regarding the unsatisfactory recruitment of a care worker.