Lily Mae Homecare Limited

Updated 10 July 2019

The inspection

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team

The inspection was carried out by one inspector.

Service and service type

Lily Mae Homecare Limited is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own homes. At the time of the inspection the agency was providing personal care to 44 people. The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

Notice of inspection

We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection visit because the manager is often out of the office supporting staff or providing care. We needed to be sure that they would be in.

What we did before inspection

We reviewed information we had received about the service. We sought feedback from the local authority and professionals who work with the service. We used all of this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection

During the inspection we spoke with five people and one relative, three care staff, a care coordinator, the compliance manager, the registered manager and the nominated individual. We reviewed records related to the care of five people. We looked at records of accidents and incidents, audits and quality assurance reports, complaints, and four staff files.

After the inspection

We continued to seek clarification from the provider to validate evidence found.

Updated 10 July 2019

About the service

Lily Mae Homecare Limited is registered as a domiciliary care agency providing the regulated activity ‘personal care’ to people who live in their own homes in Market Deeping, Bourne and Stamford. At the time of the inspection visit there were 44 people using the service.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

Systems were in place to ensure the safety of people being cared for. Records showed, and staff confirmed they had received safeguarding training and were knowledgeable about how to recognise and protect people from abuse. Risks to people were assessed and managed. Medicines were managed, procedures were in place to support this. Safeguarding issues and complaints were analysed, and improvements were made. Lower level accidents and incidents were recorded and reviewed to help learn when things go wrong.

Records confirmed staff were recruited safely.

People’s needs were appropriately assessed, and outcomes were met. Records showed, and staff confirmed that they received the training they needed to do their job well. Specialised training to support people who required more complex support was provided.

People's nutritional needs were met, those with more complex needs who required a specialised diet were catered for. Care records were detailed, and staff described the support required to assist people with swallowing needs well. 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.

People’s consent to care was not recorded in their care records. We acknowledged verbal agreements were reached when people start using the service, but this was not recorded to demonstrate people are receiving the care which has been agreed and they consent to it.

The provider immediately implemented a simple process to address this.

The service being delivered was caring and was delivered by a staff team who were kind, considerate and empathetic. Staff described a 'family' atmosphere and approach. The registered provider had the interests of people using the service and their staff team at heart. People were given the opportunity to express their views. Staff demonstrated good awareness of how to maintain privacy and dignity.

People were receiving care which was responsive to their needs. People were consulted about the care they received and were asked for feedback. People would benefit from learning more about what action is being taken to address their concerns. The registered manager was aware of this and was considering how to feedback from the latest quality assurance surveys. Complaints were well managed we saw evidence of good customer satisfaction and compliments.

The provider has a clear direction and vision. Leadership is visible, accessible and the management team lead by example. Staff were complimentary of the support they receive from the management team. Morale in the team was good and there was a good team working ethos.

Processes were in place to ensure that the delivery of care was monitored and checked regularly. Plans for improvement were implemented and actioned. The registered manager and the team work in partnership with other health and social care professionals within the community.

Rating at last inspection

At the last inspection the service was rated Requires Improvement and was published on 21 December 2017.

Why we inspected

This was a scheduled inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received, we may inspect sooner.

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