You are here

Cathedral Gate Domiciliary Care Services Good

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

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 24 July 2018

This inspection took place on 23 May and 1 June 2018 and was announced.

This service 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 Cathedral Gate Domiciliary Care Services receives regulated activity. CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’, and help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. For people who receive a regulated activity, we also take into account any wider social care provided.

The last inspection took place on 16 December 2016 and 12 and 13 January 2017. We identified two breaches in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. This was because risks were not always identified and sufficiently addressed, medication profiles were not in place and records of topical ointments and creams were not maintained. In addition, auditing of the service was not fully effective, and findings were not used to improve the service. We also made a recommendation to develop a more person centred approach to care planning.

Following the last inspection, we asked the provider to complete an action plan to show what they would do and by when, to improve the key questions of whether the service was safe, effective, responsive and well led to at least good. At this inspection, improvements had been made to all areas, although further work was needed in relation to the well led domain.

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. The registered manager was not available on the first day of the inspection, but was present on the second day.

Following the last inspection, the registered manager had researched quality auditing systems and the formats available. However, further work was needed to implement these and to ensure an overview of different areas of the service.

Improvements had been made to people’s care plans. The information reflected people’s needs, the support they required and their interests. The content of the plans was easy to read, detailed and person centred.

A new format had been introduced for staff to document the administration of people’s medicines. The information gave clear instructions which minimised the risk of error.

People were happy with the service they received. They said they were supported by a consistent team of staff who knew them well. People told us staff generally arrived on time and there were no concerns about staff not arriving to support them. They told us staff asked for their consent and always did what was asked on them.

People were complimentary about the staff. Staff were well supported and received a range of training to help them to undertake their role more effectively. Safe recruitment practice was followed and new staff received a thorough induction before working with people on their own. There were enough staff to support people.

There was a strong culture that was built on kindness and compassion. Core values, such as dignity and respect, were an integral part of service provision.

People told us they felt safe. Staff were aware of their responsibilities to identify and report a suspicion or allegation of abuse.

People were supported with meal preparation and encouraged to drink sufficient amounts. They were supported with their health care needs as required. The agency had built good relationships with local services.

People knew how to make a complaint and were encouraged to give their views of the service. Any requests or suggestions were addressed although there was not an overview, whi

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 24 July 2018

The service was safe.

There were enough staff to support people.

Medicines were safely managed.

Safe recruitment practice was being followed.

Effective

Good

Updated 24 July 2018

The service was effective.

People were supported in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

Staff had the knowledge and skills to support people effectively.

People were supported to have enough to eat and drink.

Caring

Good

Updated 24 July 2018

The service was caring.

There was a strong culture, which was built on kindness and compassion.

People�s rights to privacy and dignity were promoted.

People were complimentary about the staff.

Responsive

Good

Updated 24 July 2018

The service was responsive.

People received a service that was responsive to their needs.

Improvements had been made to people�s care plans.

People and their relatives knew how to make a complaint.

Well-led

Requires improvement

Updated 24 July 2018

The service was not always well led.

An auditing system had been researched but not fully implemented.

There was not an overview of different aspects of the service.

There was a strong, caring ethos which was fully applied in practice.