You are here

George Springall Homecare Partnership Outstanding

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Outstanding

Updated 21 July 2017

This announced inspection took place on 18 May 2017. George Springall Homecare is a domiciliary care agency providing support and care to people in their own homes in the South Oxfordshire area. At the time of our inspection there were 13 people using the service.

There was a registered manager in post. 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 received safe care from staff who had been trained to protect people and identify signs of abuse. Risk assessments were implemented and reflected the current level of risk to people. Staff understood their responsibilities to report any concerns and followed the provider's policies in relation to safeguarding and whistleblowing.

There were enough staff to keep people safe and appropriate arrangements were in place for emergency staff cover. Recruitment processes were designed to ensure only suitable staff were selected to work with people.

The service used an electronic monitoring system which staff accessed using mobile phones supplied by the provider. The system ensured people's most current care plans were available to staff. It also enabled the service to monitor in real time the support people were receiving in relation to personal care, food and drink or medicines. As a result, the system for monitoring the quality and safety of care provided to people was efficient and effective.

Staff managed medicines consistently and safely. People and their relatives told us they received their medicines at the times they needed them and they were happy with the support they received.

Staff received a wide range of training that matched people's needs. Staff were encouraged to reflect on their practice and to develop their skills and knowledge, which improved people's experience of care.

Staff were aware of their duties under the Mental Capacity Act 2005. They obtained people's consent before carrying out care tasks and followed legal requirements where people did not have the capacity to consent.

The service demonstrated a strong commitment to promoting people's independence. Staff worked closely with people to build their confidence and learn to do more for themselves.

The service was extremely responsive to supporting people whose needs were complex and tended to change. We were repeatedly told of numerous occasions where the service had gone above and beyond of what was expected of them.

Care plans were personalised and centred on people's preferences, views and experiences as well as their care and support needs. People's history, family relationships and religious and cultural needs were taken into account.

People and relatives were delighted with the kindness and thoughtfulness of staff, which exceeded their expectations of how they would be cared for and supported. People explained how staff went the extra mile for them and assured us they couldn't ask for anything more. People told us the support they received significantly improved their well-being.

People’s relatives told us that the service went above their contractual duties by providing their loved ones with end of life care. The relatives said staff helped them to put their minds at ease and get through the difficult time. The provider's philosophy, vision and values were understood and shared within the staff team.

The service was extremely responsive to people’s needs and wishes even if the support people needed proved to exceed their contracted hours. People told us that staff went over and above the call of duty. People also said this made a profound difference to their lives.

People felt consulted and listened to about how their care would be delivered. Care plans were personalised and centred on people's preferen

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 21 July 2017

The service was safe.

People were kept safe from abuse. The registered manager and staff understood their responsibilities and knew how to report any concerns.

Risks to people's well-being were assessed, managed and regularly reviewed.

Medicines were administered safely.

Effective

Good

Updated 21 July 2017

The service was effective.

Staff had completed training to enable them to provide people with care effectively. Staff were supervised and felt well supported by the whole team and the registered manager.

Staff understood the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and how this applied to their daily work.

People received support with their dietary needs in line with their choice and health requirements. People were supported to access healthcare professionals when they needed to.

Caring

Outstanding

Updated 21 July 2017

The service was exceptionally caring.

The management team and staff were committed to providing the highest quality care possible.

Staff treated people with respect and dignity and took time to build positive caring relationships with people. They knew people well and were well liked by people.

People told us that staff went the extra mile for people they supported. People's feedback was overwhelmingly positive about the service.

Responsive

Outstanding

Updated 21 July 2017

The responsiveness of the service was outstanding.

The service went the extra mile for providing people with personalised care in which emphasis was put on the quality of people’s lives and meeting people’s needs and preferences.

The service was extremely flexible and responsive to people's needs.

People using the service and their relatives knew how to raise a concern or make a complaint.

Well-led

Good

Updated 21 July 2017

The service was well-led.

Staff understood the vision and values of the service and knew how to put these into practice. People benefitted from being supported by staff who felt valued and were motivated to provide them with individualised care.

The registered manager led by example. They understood the needs of the people who used the service.

There were systems in place to monitor the quality of the service provided and to promote best practice.