You are here

Candlelight Homecare Sherborne Area Office Good

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 22 November 2018

The inspection took place on 15 and 16 September 2018 and was announced.

Candlelight Homecare Services Sherborne is a domiciliary care agency. At the time of the inspection it was providing personal care to 71 people living in their own houses and flats in the community. It provides a service to older people and younger adults some of whom have a physical disability, learning disability, sensory impairment or dementia.

Not everyone using Candlelight Care Sherborne receives a 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

The service had a newly appointed manager in place. 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 received their care and support at their agreed time, and received rota’s letting them know who would be visiting them. They told us that they were supported by familiar staff, who they had got to know and saw regularly. At the time of the inspection staff told us they were working additional hours to support a number of vacant hours.

There was a risk that people may not always be supported by suitable staff in their own homes as full employment checks had not always taken place. Some staff were allowed to start work by shadowing more senior staff before references and disclosure and barring [DBS] information had been received. The provider took action to reduce the risk immediately following the inspection.

People told us they were supported by familiar staff, and staff arrived on time. The provider told us although they were currently understaffed they had ensured all people receiving a service did so with the correct amount of staff and on time. People confirmed they had not had any late calls.

People received a kind and caring approach to their support needs and told us they would recommend the service. One relative said, “The staff are a great support. They really do encourage [ relative] to do as much as they can for themselves. I would recommend this service any day.”

Initial assessments were completed with people to establish whether the service would be able to meet their presenting needs. From the initial assessment a care plan was drawn up. People told us they had been involved in their assessments and received regular review of their care and support.

Risk assessments were monitored to keep people safe whilst promoting people’s independence and rights to make their own decisions. General environmental risks to people were assessed such as fire safety and home security. People also had personalised risk assessments to reduce risks associated with things such as their skin integrity, medicines and health conditions or dementia.

People were supported by staff who had received safeguarding training and knew how to keep people safe from harm or abuse. People were supported to understand what keeping safe meant. Staff told us they reported any accident and used body maps to identify where any injuries had occurred. The registered manager told us accidents and incidents was analysed to establish any trends.

People received their medicines on time and as prescribed. Staff understood the importance of infection prevention and control, and wore protective equipment appropriately when supporting people. Any medicine errors were reported and lessons learnt, and additional training provided if needed.

People felt the service listened to them and made changes to support their requests. A complaints process was in place and people told us they would be happy to raise a complaint if they needed to. We observed complaints had been reso

Inspection areas

Safe

Requires improvement

Updated 22 November 2018

The service was not always safe.

There was a risk that people may be supported by unsuitable staff as full employment checks had not always taken place before some staff were allowed to start work.

People were protected from discrimination and staff understood how to manage different risks to keep people safe in their own homes.

People told us they felt safe. People were protected by staff who had a good understanding of how to safeguard people from abuse or harm.

Medicines were managed safely. People received their medicines on time and as prescribed.

Lessons were learnt and improvements were made when things went wrong.

Effective

Good

Updated 22 November 2018

The service was effective.

People were asked to consent to their support and staff understood the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

Staff received training and supervision to give them the skills they needed to carry out their roles.

The service worked with other healthcare services to deliver effective care.

People�s needs and choices were assessed and effective systems were in place to deliver good care and treatment.

Caring

Good

Updated 22 November 2018

The service was caring.

People were supported by staff who were compassionate and kind.

Staff knew how people liked to be supported and offered them appropriate choices.

People were supported by staff that respected and promoted their independence, privacy and dignity.

Responsive

Good

Updated 22 November 2018

The service was responsive.

Care plans and support were person-centred. These were regularly reviewed with involvement from people and relevant others.

People knew how to complain and had confidence that issues would be investigated. Complaints were resolved in line with the service�s policy.

Staff had received end of life care training and were therefore able to link with other agencies when people, and those important to them, required this support.

Well-led

Good

Updated 22 November 2018

The service was well led.

Staff felt happy and supported in their roles.

Staff felt their work was valued and recognised with opportunities to develop their skills and knowledge.

Audits were done to help ensure the quality of the service.

People and those important to them felt consulted and involved.

The service had established and maintained good working relationships with partner agencies such as GP surgeries and social work teams.