7 April 2016
During a routine inspection
This was the first inspection since registering with the Care Quality Commission in December 2014.
Goldsmith Personnel Limited (West London) is a domiciliary care agency that provides personal care to people living at home. It provides care and support to adults of all ages, but most of the people using the service at the time of our inspection were older people.
During our inspection the agency provided care and support to 23 people living in the London Borough of Brent and Ealing, care was provided by 16 care workers.
The registered manager had recently left the agency; we met with the acting manager on the day of our inspection. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission [CQC] 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 were well treated by the staff and felt safe and trusted them.
Staff could clearly explain how they would recognise and report abuse and they understood their responsibilities in keeping people safe.
Where any risks to people’s safety had been identified, the management had thought about and discussed with the person ways to mitigate and minimise risks.
People told us that staff usually came at the time they were supposed to or they would phone to say they were running a bit late and confirmed that if two staff were required they would come at the same time.
The service was following robust recruitment procedures to make sure that only suitable staff were employed at the agency.
Staff we spoke with had a good knowledge of the medicines that people they visited were taking. People told us they were satisfied with the way their medicines were managed.
People who used the service and their relatives were positive about the staff and told us they had confidence in their abilities and staff told us that they were provided with training in the areas they needed in order to support people effectively.
Staff understood that it was not right to make choices for people when they could make choices for themselves and people’s ability around decision making, preferences and choices were recorded in their care plans and followed by staff.
People told us they were happy with the support they received with eating and drinking and staff were aware of people’s dietary requirements and preferences.
People confirmed that they were involved as much as they wanted to be in the planning of their care and support. Care plans included the views of people using the service and their relatives. Relatives told us they were kept up to date about any changes by office staff.
People and their relatives told us that the management and staff were quick to respond to any changes in their needs and care plans reflected how people were supported to receive care and treatment in accordance with their needs and preferences.
People told us they had no complaints about the service but said they felt able to raise any concerns without worry.
The service had a number of quality monitoring systems including yearly surveys for people using the service, their relatives and other stakeholders. People we spoke with confirmed that they were asked about the quality of the service and had made comments about this. They felt the service took their views into account in order to improve service delivery.