We carried out a review of the data available to us about Pendeen Community Care 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 Pendeen Community Care Limited, you can give feedback on this service.
People’s experience of using this service:
People were supported by staff that were caring, compassionate and treated them with the utmost dignity and respect. Any concerns or worries were listened and responded to and used as opportunities to improve.
People received person centred care and support based on their individual needs and preferences. Staff were aware of people's life history, and their communication needs. They used this information to develop positive, meaningful relationships with people.
People told us they felt well cared for by staff who treated them with respect and dignity and encouraged them to maintain relationships and keep their independence for as long as possible.
The provider ensured people had regular staff meaning people and staff were able to build positive relationships. People were supported by staff who had the skills and knowledge to meet their needs. Staff understood and felt confident in their role.
Staff liaised with other health care professionals to ensure people's safety and meet their health needs.
Where people lacked capacity, staff worked with the local authority to make sure they minimised any restrictions on people’s freedom for their safety and wellbeing.
Staff spoke positively about working for the provider. They felt well supported and that they could talk to management at any time, feeling confident any concerns would be acted on promptly. They felt valued and happy in their work.
Audits were completed by staff, the registered manager and provider to check the quality and safety of the service.
The registered manager, director and human resources director team worked well to lead the staff team in their roles and ensure people received a good service.
More information is in Detailed Findings below
Rating at last inspection: Good. (Report published 15 June 2016)
Why we inspected: This was a planned comprehensive inspection based on the rating of Good at the last inspection. The service remained rated Good overall.
Follow up: We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received we may inspect sooner.
At the time of our inspection 67 people were receiving a personal care service. These services were funded either privately, through Cornwall Council or NHS funding.
There was a registered manager in post who was responsible for the day-to-day running of the service. 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.
We carried out this announced inspection on 16 and 18 May 2016. The service was last inspected in February 2014 and was found to be meeting the regulations.
People we spoke with told us they were positive about the support they received from the service. They said the service was, “Absolutely brilliant”, “Very good, no fault to find whatever,” “Really good, I can’t fault anyone” and “A very good company, caring, I don’t think there is anything wrong.” A social care professional told us the service was, “Extremely helpful and diligent.”
People told us they felt safe. Staff had received training in how to recognise and report abuse. All were clear about how to report any concerns and were confident that any allegations made would be fully investigated to help ensure people were protected.
There were enough suitably qualified staff available to meet people’s needs. The service was flexible and responded to people’s changing needs. People told us they had a team of regular staff and their visits were at the agreed times. People told us they had never experienced a missed care visit.
People received care from staff who knew them well, and had the knowledge and skills to meet their needs. People and their relatives spoke very highly of staff and typical comments included; “Very good”, “Very, very caring”, “All the staff are very nice and friendly,” and “Brilliant, absolutely brilliant”.
Staff were knowledgeable about the people they cared for and knew how to recognise if people’s needs changed.
Staff were aware of people’s preferences and interests, as well as their health and support needs, which enabled them to provide a personalised service. Staff were kind and compassionate and treated people with dignity and respect.
The management had a clear understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and how to make sure people who did not have the mental capacity to make decisions for themselves had their legal rights protected.
Staff told us there was good communication with the management of the service. Staff said management were, “Very approachable,” and “Really helpful.”
There were effective quality assurance systems in place. The service had an effective management team, and Care Quality Commission registration, and notification requirements had been complied with.
We observed documents were stored in a locked facility and were only accessible to people involved in the individuals care.
The care plans directed staff as to how to assist and/or support people in line with their wishes and individual needs.
People told us and we saw evidence of pre-care assessments including risk assessments of peoples' needs to ensure the agency could provide the required level of care. The care plans we reviewed were sufficiently detailed to direct and inform staff about how care was to be provided. We saw evidence of regular reviews of care plans to ensure the care provided took account of any changes that had occurred.
Staff were supported to deliver care and treatment safely and to an appropriate standard.
People were protected against the risk of inappropriate or unsafe care and treatment because the provider had effective systems in place which assessed and monitored the quality of services provided by the agency.
People were not protected from the risks of unsafe or inappropriate care and treatment because accurate and appropriate records were maintained
People told us and we saw evidence of pre-care assessments of peoples' needs to ensure the agency could provide the required level of care. The care plans we looked at were not always sufficiently detailed to direct and inform staff as to how the care was to be provided.
Staff undertook appropriate induction training which was supplemented by regular supervision and management appraisals.
You can see our judgements on the front page of this report.