We carried out a review of the data available to us about Serendipity Healthcare Ltd 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 Serendipity Healthcare Ltd, you can give feedback on this service.
Serendipity Healthcare Ltd is a domiciliary care agency, providing personal care to people living in their own homes. At the time of our inspection 217 people were using the service who all received support with personal care.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People and their relatives told us they felt safe with the care provided. Risks which affected people’s daily lives were assessed and monitored. Staff were recruited safely, and the majority of people told us they received their visits on time. A small proportion of people told us that staff were sometimes late. The service was aware of this through their quality monitoring processes and were working to improve this. Medicines were managed safely and administered by trained staff. We were assured that the provider had sufficient infection, prevention and control measures in place. The registered manager had contingency plans in place to address events which may disrupt service delivery.
People’s preferences and choices had been identified in their care plans and care records had been regularly reviewed and updated to reflect people’s changing needs. Staff had completed mandatory induction training prior to delivering services to people, staff regularly refreshed and updated their training. Staff worked with other agencies to ensure people had access to healthcare and support.
People spoke positively about staff and were involved with their care planning including how they wished to be supported. Staff understood how to promote people’s independence and respected people’s privacy and dignity.
People received personalised care during their visits that was tailored to their needs and preferences. People and their relatives told us they knew how to complain and were regularly given opportunity to raise any concerns. The service had received many compliments about the care staff had provided.
The registered manager had quality assurance systems in place which ensured all aspects of the service were regularly audited. There was a positive, person centred approach to the planning and provision of people's care, this was demonstrated by the staff knowledge and understanding of the people they were supporting.
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 (published 29 October 2019).
Why we inspected
We undertook this inspection as part of a random selection of services rated Good.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.
Serendipity Healthcare, is a domiciliary care provider providing personal care to people living in their own homes, so they can live as independently as possible. At the time of our inspection 280 people were using the service. 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.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
There were enough staff to effectively meet the current packages of care which supported people's needs. People were supported by staff who had the knowledge and skills to ensure they were safe from harm. Risk assessments had been completed, to assess and reduce any risks associated with required support. Staff were recruited in line with best practice. Medicines were managed safely and staff adhered to clear infection control practices. The provider had reflected on any incidents, and lessons had been learned.
People were supported by a regular team of care staff, people said they generally received their calls on time. People were confident care staff had received appropriate training to meet their needs; we saw this was in line with best practice and current guidelines. When people required support with their nutritional intake, this was recorded and reflective of their needs.
People’s care was provided by kind and caring staff and people told us they treated them with respect. Care plans reflected individual needs, and any support with communication was identified and addressed. Care staff understood the importance of respecting people's diverse needs and promoting independence.
The provider worked in partnership with other agencies to make sure people received the right care and support. Healthcare was promoted, by staff working in partnership with health and social care professionals. The provider ensured that any complaints had been responded to, and people and staff were encouraged to give feedback.
Auditing and quality assurance processes were robust, systems were in place to further monitor and drive improvement. People were involved in their care and asked for their feedback. This helped to support the development of the service. There was a complaints procedure and any received were investigated and responded to.
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 (28 March 2017).
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.
This inspection took place on 31January 2017. The service is run from an office in Chesterfield and provides care to people in north Derbyshire. The provider was given 48 hours' notice because the location provides a domiciliary care service and we wanted to make sure the registered manager was available. In addition we also carried out telephone calls to nine people using the service and four relatives on 16 and 17 February 2017.
There was a registered manager at 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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
People did not always received personalised care in a consistent manner. Care was not always provided at the preferred time or from a regular care worker.
The service was following the guidance in people’s risk assessments and care plans which meant the risk of unsafe care was reduced. People’s records were up to date and indicated that care was being provided as detailed in people’s assessments. Records had been updated to reflect changes in people’s care needs. Medicines were managed safely.
People were safeguarded from abuse because the provider had relevant guidance in place. Staff were knowledgeable about the reporting procedure. The provider's arrangements for staff recruitment and deployment helped to make sure there were sufficient staff who were fit to work at the service to provide people’s care.
Staff understood their roles and responsibilities for people's care and safety needs and for reporting any related concerns. The provider's arrangements for staff training and their operational procedures supported this.
The principles and requirements of the Mental Capacity Act (2005) were being met. When required, best interest decisions and capacity assessments had been completed. People were supported by staff who knew them well. Staff were aware of promoting people’s safety, whilst providing information to support people to make day-to-day decisions.
People received appropriate support to manage their meals and nutrition when required. This was done in a way to meet with their needs and choices. People’s health needs were met. Referrals to external health professionals were made in a timely manner.
People and their relatives told us the care staff were caring and kind and that their privacy and dignity was maintained when personal care was provided. People and their relatives were involved in the planning of their care and support.
Complaints were well managed. The leadership of the service was praised by external professionals and relatives and communication systems were effective. Systems to monitor the quality of the service Identified issues for improvement. These were resolved in a timely manner and the provider had obtained feedback about the quality of the service from people, their relatives and staff.