We carried out a review of the data available to us about Goldsmith Personnel Limited (Oxfordshire) 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 Goldsmith Personnel Limited (Oxfordshire), you can give feedback on this service.
Goldsmith Personnel Limited (Oxfordshire) offers a domiciliary service for people living in their homes in the Chipping Norton and surrounding areas. 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. On the day of our inspection 42 people were receiving a personal care service.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
Since the last inspection, improvements had been made with the quality assurance processes. Systems were now in place to check on different aspects of the service. This helped the provider and registered manager monitor the service more effectively.
We received positive feedback on the service from people using the service, their relatives and from staff. Comments from people using the service included, “It’s absolutely amazing. I’m blown away with them [staff]. It’s so personal” and “They [staff] are extremely capable. They take an interest in our daily lives so there is always something to talk about.” Relatives also commented favourably about the staff team and registered manager (who had taken on this position since the last inspection). Their feedback included, “They [staff] go out of their way to make her [person using the service] comfortable. If she’s not so well, they are good at cheering her up and she feels good with them supporting her.”
Safeguarding notifications to the relevant bodies had been made where required and appropriate action taken. Medicines were administered safely in line with prescribed needs.
There were effective infection prevention and control systems in place to ensure the risk of infection was managed. People and relatives were happy with how staff had visited them, following infection control procedures, during the COVID-19 pandemic.
There was an open culture and staff were complimentary about the registered manager and confirmed there was good communication and they felt supported. The registered manager had been in this role since earlier in 2020 and was keen to make continuous improvements, share best practice and ensure staff were well trained in their role.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection and update: The last rating for this service was Requires Improvement (published 6 January 2020) where there was one breach of regulation 17. The provider completed an action plan after the last inspection to show what they would do and by when to improve. At this inspection we found improvements had been made and the provider was no longer in breach of the regulations.
Why we inspected
We undertook this focused inspection to check they had followed their action plan and to confirm they now met legal requirements. This report only covers our findings in relation to the Key Questions: Safe and Well-Led, as these had been rated Requires Improvement.
The ratings from the previous comprehensive inspection for those key questions not looked at on this occasion were used in calculating the overall rating at this inspection. The overall rating for the service has changed from Requires Improvement to Good. This is based on the findings at this inspection.
You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Goldsmith Personnel Limited (Oxfordshire) on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.
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.
Goldsmith Personnel Limited (Oxfordshire) is a domiciliary care service providing personal care to people living in their own home. At the time of the inspection the service was supporting 27 people.
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
The provider's quality assurance systems and processes to monitor the service had not been effective. There was no clear plan in place to check that people’s records were up to date and reviewed on a regular basis and that care workers were supported through regular refresher training, supervision and checks on their work. Audits had not been part of the monitoring of the service and the provider had not overseen the service to ensure it was running appropriately. The provider took steps, following the first day of the inspection, to start to address the issues.
Staff understood their responsibilities to identify and report any concerns. The provider had recruitment and selection processes in place, although these needed to be monitored to ensure the recruitment information obtained was checked.
Care plans detailed people's support needs and how care workers should support people to meet those needs. Information varied, with some records being very informative whilst others were written more broadly and lacked details on people's individual preferences.
Risks to people's safety and well-being were managed through a risk management process. However, where people required two care workers to mobilise them safely, this had not always been carried out.
Feedback from people, relatives and professionals was positive about the service. People said there had been some changes with the office staff and care workers. However, for most of the time people were happy with the support they received from the care workers.
People told us the care workers were caring and kind. Their commitment and knowledge enabled people to receive a good level of care. The registered manager had supported people to remain in their own homes and enjoy a better quality of life.
There had been no missed visits to people and people said visits were generally on time.
The registered manager and staff team worked with GPs and other healthcare professionals to ensure people's changing needs were safely and effectively met. Medicines were managed safely, and people received their medicines as prescribed.
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 9 May 2017).
You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Goldsmith Personnel Limited (Oxfordshire) on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
Enforcement
We have identified a breach in relation to regulation 17 (Good governance) of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.
The provider was responsive to the findings of the inspection and had developed an action plan during the inspection process to work on the areas needing to be improved.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our reinspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.
The service had a registered manager. 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. At the time of the inspection, the registered manager was on extended leave. The service was being run by a manager during this period.
At the last inspection on 21 February 2016, we asked the provider to take action to make improvements. These included ensuring risks to people were recorded in their care records. At this inspection on 4 April 2017 we found improvements had been made. Risk assessments in relation to people’s individual risks were in place. These set out how to support people in a way that mitigated the hazards identified.
There were enough care staff deployed by the service to support people safely. Checks were carried out on care staff before they began working at the service to ensure they were suitable to work with vulnerable people. Care staff had the knowledge and received training how to recognise and report concerns to keep people safe. Records regarding people’s medicines had been completed.
At the last inspection on 21 February 2016, we asked the provider to take action to make improvements. These included ensuring the manager and all staff understood their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and accurately recorded any decisions necessary. At this inspection on 4 April 2017 we found improvements had been made. The service followed the guidelines within the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and consent to care was sought before care was undertaken. People’s hydration and nutrition needs were managed well. People were supported to have access to health professionals where needed.
Staff received the training and support from their managers that enabled them to deliver effective care and carry out their roles and responsibilities.
People were supported by caring staff who took the time to get to know people’s needs. People were provided with information about their care and privacy and dignity was respected and promoted.
People had been assessed to determine if the service was able to meet their needs. Care plans were accurate, up to date and contained personalised information about people’s care and emotional needs and relevant personal history. Regular reviews of people’s care needs had taken place. People knew how to complain and complaints were responded to in line with provider’s policy.
The manager promoted a positive culture that meant people had personalised care from staff that cared for them. The service was well managed and care staff commented they felt supported and said how much they enjoyed their jobs. Records were well kept and were up to date which meant care was monitored closely. Quality of the service was monitored and actioned if changes or improvements were needed.
There was a registered manager in post although they were on a planned leave of absence from the service at the time of the inspection. 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, their relatives and staff felt the service was well managed. Before the registered manager had gone on leave they had worked with the current manager to support and train them to take over the running of the service in their absence.
The management team sought feedback from people and their relatives and was continually striving to improve the quality of the service. However, systems to monitor the quality of the service were not always effective because they had not identified the issues we found during our inspection.
People felt safe when being supported by staff. Staff were clear about the action they would take to keep people safe from abuse. People and staff were confident they could raise any concerns and these would be dealt with.
People had a range of risk assessments in place. However, the service had not ensured people were always protected from the risks associated with their care. This was because where risks were identified action was not always taken to ensure the risks were mitigated.
People were asked for their consent before care was carried out. However, the manager and some staff did not understand their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) because they were not clear about the action they must take if the person was assessed as lacking capacity to consent to their care.
People told us staff were respectful, kind and caring. People were cared for in a dignified way. People were involved in their care planning. They were provided with person-centred care which encouraged choice and independence. Staff knew people well and understood their individual preferences. People were supported to maintain their health and were referred for specialist advice as required.
People told us there was enough staff to meet their needs. People told us staff were rarely late and stayed for the planned amount of time.
People felt staff were knowledgeable in how to care for them. Staff completed a range of training and were supported to gain qualifications to improve their skills and knowledge. Staff felt motivated and supported to improve the quality of care provided to people. Staff did not always benefit from having regular supervision or plans to help them improve their performance.
The management team carried out regular spot checks to ensure staff were completing the required tasks to an acceptable standard and to gather feedback about the service to check people were happy with their care.
We found two breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) regulations 2014. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of this report.