The Care Quality Commission
  • Services in your home
  • Homecare service

Archived: Deer Park Home Care

Rydon Road, Holsworthy, Devon, EX22 6HZ (01409) 254444

Provided and run by:
Holsworthy Healthcare LLP

Important: The provider of this service changed. See new profile

All Inspections

11 February 2014

During a routine inspection

In this report the name of the registered manager appears who was not managing the regulatory activities at this location at the time of the inspection. Their name appears because they were still a Registered Manager on our register at the time.

We spoke with the registered manager and general manager about future arrangements for the service. We were assisted by the deputy manager and senior care assistant to complete the inspection. We were told that the agency planned to submit an application to register a new manager on their return to work.

Deer Park Homecare is based at a local nursing home in Holsworthy.

We made contact with two people who received a service in the community. One person we spoke with told us "I can't fault them". We also visited two people who used services in the community who told us that "staff respect my privacy and dignity very well". We spoke with the relative of one person and explained the purpose of our visit. They thought what we were doing was a very good thing.

We made contact over the telephone with three members of staff. All three members of staff said they were well supported and they told us they could always pop into the office if they needed to talk about any issues they had.

All the people we spoke with said that their views and experiences were taken into account in the way the service was provided and delivered in relation to their care. We were told of specific examples that were resolved by management.

13, 20 March 2013

During a routine inspection

We carried out this unannounced inspection to the registered office over one day. We looked in detail at some key records, which included care plans, risk assessments, staff training and recruitment files and minutes of meetings. This helped us to make a judgement about how well the service was being run. We spoke with eight people who currently use the service. We also spoke with four staff and the manager of the agency.

We found people's care was being well planned. People were involved in making decisions about their care and treatment. People we spoke with said that they were happy with their care and support. Comments included 'The staff are wonderful. If you are poorly the staff know who to contact, they keep my family informed and if you need it they will call the doctor in.' 'The staff check the file, someone is coming to see if it up to date. I do know that they write in it each time.'

The service ensured that any new staff had the right checks in place to ensure they were fit to work with vulnerable people, before they commenced employment. Staff had opportunities to do training so they could do their job safely and effectively. Procedures were in place to deal with any abuse, although not all staff had a full understanding of the whole process.

The service had developed systems and checks to ensure that they reviewed and monitored the quality of care provided. This included involving and listening to people who use the service as well as staff.

16 September 2011

During a routine inspection

At the time of this inspection the agency provided services to 34 people although only five of those people received personal care from the agency. The agency employed 12 care workers.

This was a scheduled inspection and was carried out over three days on 16, 20 and 28 September 2011. On the first day we made an unannounced visit to the agency's office where we talked to a senior care worker, the Registered Manager, and the Nominated Individual for the organisation that owned the agency. We looked at the records held in the agency's office that pertained to the care people received, staff training, quality assurance and the procedures for handling people's money.

On the second day we visited four people who used the service, and two relatives, in their homes. On the third day we spoke on the telephone with two care workers who provided the personal care to the people we had visited.

People who received care and support from the agency were very positive about the way they were treated by care workers who supported them. Comments included "they couldn't be better", "they give us peace of mind", "the boss is marvellous" and "we are perfectly happy". People also said that the agency was reliable, flexible around people's changing needs, and time keeping was "excellent". Senior staff from the agency sought people's views and took action to ensure they always received good standards of care and support.

During our visit to the agency's office we found that the care and support plans for people were very brief and only showed a list of tasks that the care workers were expected to assist people with. However by the time we visited people a few days later some of these had already been improved to give clear directions to care workers about how the person wanted each task to be carried out.

People told us that all the care workers were caring and considerate and we found that they were experienced, skilled and received relevant training to do their job. However the induction training for new care workers was oriented around providing care in a care home and did not reflect the type of work that domiciliary support staff are expected to do to enable them to deliver care safely and to an appropriate standard to people in their own homes.