You are here

All Hallows Homecare - Lowestoft Good

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 2 May 2018

This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own homes. At the time of this announced comprehensive inspection of 15 & 19 March 2018, there were 45 people who used the service. We gave the service notice of our inspection to make sure that someone was available.

The location of All Hallows Homecare - Lowestoft was registered in October 2016 and this was their first inspection.

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.

There were systems in place designed to keep people safe from harm and abuse. Where incidents occurred these were learned from and used to drive improvement in the service. There were infection control processes and procedures in place to reduce the risks of cross infection. There were arrangements in place to provide people with their medicines safely, where they needed this support. There were safe recruitment systems in place and the service ensured there were enough staff to cover the required care visits.

People were cared for and supported by care workers who were trained and supported to meet their needs. Where required, people were provided with the support they needed to meet their dietary needs. People were supported to access health care professionals, where required, to maintain good health. The service worked with other professionals involved in people’s care to provide an effective and consistent service. The service was working within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. People’s consent was sought before any care was provided.

People told us that their care workers were respectful and caring. Care records guided care workers in how people’s privacy, dignity and independence was promoted and respected. People were involved in making decisions about their care and support. People’s views and preferences were valued and listened to about how their care was planned for and delivered.

People received care and support which was assessed, planned and delivered to meet their specific needs. There were systems in place to provide people with the care and support they wanted as they neared the end of their life. There was a complaint procedure in place and people knew how to raise a complaint about the service they were provided with.

There was an open and empowering culture in the service. People were asked for their views of the service and these were valued and acted on. There was a quality assurance system in place and shortfalls were addressed. As a result the quality of the service continued to improve.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 2 May 2018

The service was safe.

There were systems in place designed to reduce the risks to people and keep them safe from harm.

There were enough staff to meet people’s needs. There were safe systems for recruiting staff.

Where people needed support to take their medicines this was done safely.

Systems to minimise the risks of cross infection were in place.

Effective

Good

Updated 2 May 2018

The service was effective.

People were cared for by care workers who were trained and supported to meet their needs.

The service worked within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2015.

Where people required support with their dietary needs, this was provided. People had access to health professionals, where required.

The service worked with other professionals involved in people’s care to provide a consistent service.

Caring

Good

Updated 2 May 2018

The service was caring.

People were treated with kindness. Staff respected their privacy, independence and dignity.

People were involved in making decisions about their care and these were respected.

Responsive

Good

Updated 2 May 2018

The service was responsive.

People’s care was assessed, planned and delivered to meet their needs and preferences.

There were systems in place to support people who needed end of life care.

There was a complaints procedure in place and people knew how to make a complaint if needed.

Well-led

Good

Updated 2 May 2018

The service was well-led.

The service provided an open culture. People were asked for their views about the service.

There was an effective quality assurance system in place. As a result the quality of the service continued to improve.