Loyal Companion Care Limited

Loyal Companion Care Limited is a domiciliary care agency. At the time of the inspection, they provided personal care, to seven people.

People’s experience of using this service:

Relatives and staff said the service met people’s needs. Improvements had been made to the provider’s quality monitoring processes since our previous inspection. This ensured people now received safe and person-centred care.

People were protected from harm by staff who were trained to identify and report concerns. People were safe because potential risks to their health and wellbeing had been managed well. There were enough staff to support people safely. People were supported well to take their medicines. Lessons were learnt from incidents to prevent recurrence. Staff followed effective processes to prevent the spread of infections.

Staff had the right skills and knowledge to meet people's needs effectively. Staff had the information they required to meet people’s assessed needs. People had been supported to have enough to eat and drink. People had access to healthcare services when required. This helped people to maintain their health and well-being.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. The policies and systems in the service supported this practice. People were involved in making decisions about their care and support. Staff supported people in a way that respected and promoted their privacy and dignity. They encouraged people to be as independent as possible.

Relatives were happy with how staff supported people to meet their individual needs. They said this had been done in a caring and respectful way. There had been no recent complaints, but there was a system to manage this. The provider dealt with any issues quickly and they were committed to continuously improving the service.

Rating at last inspection:

The last rating for this service was requires improvement (published 07 July 2018) and there were two breaches of regulations. 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 regulations.

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.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk.

Loyal Companion Limited is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats in the community. It provides a service to older adults, and younger disabled adults. Not everyone using the service receives a regulated activity; CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also take into account any wider social care provided.

This is the first time we have inspected this provider.

The service had a registered manager in place. 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.

The registered manager did not have a robust auditing process which could ensure that processes were being followed by staff and that the service provided was fit for purpose.

Staffing levels were sufficient to provide the level of care required however people felt rushed and were not always provided with care for the agreed length of time.

People were not always supported to eat and drink enough to maintain a balanced diet.

The provider followed the local authority policy and guidance when dealing with safeguarding people from harm and the staff we spoke with demonstrated a good understanding of safeguarding issues.

There was a robust recruitment procedure to help ensure the staff recruited were suitable to work with the people using the service.

The service was not always flexible and responsive to people's changing needs, desires and circumstances.

Risk assessments were in place and were regularly reviewed and updated. Cleanliness and infection control procedures were in place and followed by staff to minimise the risk of acquired infection.

Staff were trained to administer medicines safely and had undertaken further training to ensure they could deal with a number of health issues. Regular checks were undertaken to help ensure on-going competence in this area.

Staff demonstrated a good understanding of their roles and responsibilities. The service demonstrated a commitment to staff training, which was on-going and regular refreshers were undertaken.

Supervisions were undertaken regularly and considered important in offering an opportunity for discussion between staff and management.

Confidentiality was respected and independence was promoted. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice

Communication with relatives was on-going throughout the duration of their relative's involvement with the service.

Comments and feedback was encouraged formally and informally and there was a complaints policy in place.

Team meetings were regularly undertaken, giving staff the opportunity to discuss any issues and to share good practice examples.

We found that the provider was not meeting some legal regulations. Further information is in the detailed findings below.

You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.