• Services in your home
  • Homecare service

Heywood Carers

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

1 Springbok Cottages, Springbok Estate, Alfold, Cranleigh, GU6 8HT (01483) 618333

Provided and run by:
Heywood Carers Limited

Important: This service was previously registered at a different address - see old profile

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about Heywood Carers 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 Heywood Carers, you can give feedback on this service.

20 February 2020

During a routine inspection

About the service

Heywood Carers is a domiciliary care agency providing personal care to 38 people at the time of the inspection.

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

People continued to benefit from an exceptionally caring, kind and compassionate service. We received overwhelmingly positive feedback about the quality of care from people and their families.

Staff promoted a strong person-centred culture and were motivated to deliver care that met and exceeded expectations. Staff were supported by an exceptionally caring management team who encouraged initiative and valued the impact this had on people’s lives.

Staffing levels were enough to ensure that people's needs were met. Staff were safely recruited.

People told us they felt safe using the service. Risks associated with people’s health and care were assessed and mitigated.

Staff were knowledgeable and well-trained. Staff told us they received support from the care manager and worked well with their colleagues.

A person-centred approach had been adopted in the assessing, planning and delivery of people's care and support.

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.

The service was well managed. Staff, people and their families praised the proactive and caring attitude of the care manager.

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 8 June 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.

6 April 2017

During a routine inspection

This inspection took place on 10 April 2017 and was announced. The provider was given 48 hours’ notice because the location provides a domiciliary care and we needed to be sure that someone would be available. Phone calls to people and staff took place on 06 April 2017.

Heywood Carers is a domiciliary care agency providing hourly support to older people in their own homes. At the time of our inspection they were supporting 45 people.

There was a registered manager in post. 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 received support from experienced, committed and compassionate staff. Staff were always looking for ways to improve people’s lives and frequently went the extra mile. This support had resulted in improvements in some people’s welfare and quality of life. For example one person who could not go out was helped by their carers who used their initiative to help them get a wheelchair and they now went out.

People and professionals provided overwhelmingly positive feedback about the service and individual carers. Staff liaised with healthcare professionals and community services to meet people’s needs and achieve outcomes for them. Staff practice was regularly checked through frequent robust spot checks.

The provider had a strong vision and identity for the service. The service had a very good reputation and strong links with the local community. Recruitment processes made sure staff were appropriate for their roles and a strict selection criteria ensured staff were skilled and experienced enough to provide a high quality of care. Staff were deployed in a way that meant people received support at the times they specified.

The provider regularly sought people’s feedback to identify any changes or improvements that could be made. People knew how to make a complaint. The provider had never received a complaint about the service but they had received 60 compliments in the last 12 months.

Staff worked around existing caring relationships to ensure people’s needs were met in a person centred way. Care plans contained all the information that staff needed to provide responsive care. Risks to people were assessed and plans implemented to minimise hazards. Reviews were undertaken regularly.

People were matched with staff that they got along with. Staff were consistent and had access to information to get to know people. People told us that staff were respectful when entering people’s homes. Staff promoted people’s privacy and dignity.

Staff understood their roles in safeguarding people. Staff received training to ensure they were effective in their roles. Staff were trained in how to manage medicines and knew about medicines that people were taking.

People’s dietary needs were met by trained staff. Staff felt supported by management and received regular supervision. Staff understood the Mental Capacity Act (2005) and how it applied to their work. Staff had regular contact with management and were able to make suggestions to improve the lives of people at the service.