You are here

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

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 4 August 2017

Dana Care provides a personal care support service to people in their own home. At the time of this inspection the agency was providing a service to around 70 people, employing 26 members of staff.

This inspection was announced and took place on 17 and 18 May 2017. We told the provider two days before our visit that we would be coming to ensure that the people we needed to talk to would be available.

People’s care and support needs were met. People and relatives highly valued the service provided to them giving many examples of where the staff went ‘the extra mile’ in meeting needs. They reported that staff were highly motivated and always striving to support them in any way they could. The agency responded promptly when people’s needs changed, enabling them to remain at home.

Dana Care offered outstanding end of life care support to people. Staff care for and support people that mattered to the person who was dying with empathy and understanding. Where people had no relatives, care workers sat with them to ensure that they were not on their own.

Staff had been trained in safeguarding adults and were knowledgeable about the types of abuse and how to take action if they had concerns.

Accidents and incidents were monitored to look for any trends where action could be taken to reduce likelihood of recurrence.

Robust recruitment systems were being followed to make sure that suitable, qualified staff were employed in the right numbers for effective running of the service.

Where people needed assistance with their medicines, this was managed safely.

The staff team were trained so that they were equipped with the knowledge and skills for them to fulfil their role effectively.

Staff were well supported through supervision sessions with a line manager, and an annual performance review.

Staff and the manager were aware of the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and acted in people’s best interests where people lacked capacity to consent.

People and staff were very positive about the standards of care provided and how the agency responded with every assistance when this was needed. People were treated compassionately as individuals, with staff knowing people’s needs.

People’s care needs had been thoroughly assessed and care plans put in place to inform staff of how to care for and support people. The plans were person centred, up to date and accurate.

There were complaint systems in place and people were aware of how to make a complaint.

The agency was well led with a positive, open culture.

There were systems in place to audit and monitor the quality of service provided to people.

Inspection areas



Updated 4 August 2017

The service was safe.

People were protected from harm because risks were identified and mitigated through risk assessment procedures.

People were supported safely with assistance in taking medicines they required.

There were sufficient staff with the right skills and knowledge to meet people’s needs.



Updated 4 August 2017

The service was effective.

People were supported by staff who were appropriately trained and they were also supported through regular supervision.

People’s rights were protected because staff followed the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005.



Updated 4 August 2017

The service was extremely caring.

People reported that the agency and staff went above and beyond that which they were contracted and provided an outstanding service. People described the care they received as ‘absolutely brilliant’, saying ‘I can’t speak highly enough of them’.

Staff were highly motivated and provided compassionate care to people.

Staff provided outstanding end of life care to people, providing support to people who were dying and those that were important to them. They ensured that people who had no family were not on their own.



Updated 4 August 2017

The service was responsive to people’s changing needs.

People received the care they needed with care plans reflecting their individual needs and goals.

The agency had a complaints procedure and people felt able to raise any concerns.



Updated 4 August 2017

The service was well led.

There were systems in place to monitor the quality of service provided.

There was a positive culture where people and staff were confident to report any concerns to the management team.