You are here

Home Sweet Home Care Agency Ltd Good

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 17 March 2018

Our inspection of Home Sweet Home Care Agency Limited took place on 30 January 2018 and 1 February 2018 and was announced. This was the first inspection of the service since registering with us on 25 October 2016. The service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own homes in the community. It provides a service to older people, younger adults, people with a learning disability or autistic spectrum disorder, people with physical disabilities and people living with dementia. At the time of our visit the service provided personal care to 41 people.

The company director was also the registered manager for the service. A registered manager is a person who is registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have a legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated regulations about how the service is run.

The ‘nominated individual’ undertook a management role at the service and was present at the time of inspection. A nominated individual is a person named as the main contact for an organisation.

There was a positive culture within the service; people were treated with dignity and respect. People’s care plans showed that there was a strong commitment to person centred care and risks to people were assessed and managed. People were supported to make their own decisions; this was encouraged and reflected in their care plans. Care plans demonstrated that the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 had been applied.

Staff had access to training and plans to enhance the training provision were in place. The registered manager carried out competency checks and spot checks to ensure staff were competent in the role they were carrying out. However, the provider was unable to evidence that all staff had undertaken medication training and competency checks. Records in this area required improvement to ensure all staff were competent to administer medicines.

Staff understood what action to take to safeguard people from abuse; however, they required further training in this area. This training had already been arranged by the provider.

People’s nutritional and hydration needs were catered for. Staff supported people with their choice of meals and care plans contained information about people's dietary preferences.

The management completed investigations into incidents and accidents. Investigations were thorough and comprehensive and lessons learned were reflected upon and recorded. This meant that the likelihood of future similar incidents was reduced.

People were protected from the risks of infection through the provision of personal protective equipment.

There was a complaints procedure in place which allowed people to voice their concerns if they were unhappy with the service they received. There were no active complaints at the time of the inspection.

There was a range of quality audits in place completed by senior care staff, the registered manager and the manager. These were up to date and completed on a daily, weekly and monthly basis. All of the people we spoke with told us they felt the service was well-led and that they felt listened to and could approach management with concerns.

Inspection areas

Safe

Requires improvement

Updated 17 March 2018

The service was not always safe.

People received their medication safely.

Recruitment checks were in place but recording needed to be more robust.

People were safeguarded from the risk of abuse but staff required further training to increase their confidence in this area.

People had individual risk management plans in place to keep them safe.

Effective

Good

Updated 17 March 2018

The service was effective.

People’s needs were assessed and they were supported by staff who had the skills and the knowledge to assist them.

Staff received regular supervision and appraisal which they said they found supportive.

Care plans took into account the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

People were supported to maintain good health and had access to healthcare professionals and services.

Staff encouraged and supported people to have meals of their choice.

Caring

Good

Updated 17 March 2018

The service was caring.

Positive feedback was received from people who used the service and their relatives. They commended the caring nature of the staff.

Staff understood people’s needs and were able to provide person centred support.

People’s rights to privacy and dignity were respected.

Responsive

Good

Updated 17 March 2018

The service was responsive.

People received person centred care which focused on their individual needs.

People, and their relatives, knew how to raise concerns and were confident the registered manager would listen.

People were supported with community activities.

Well-led

Good

Updated 17 March 2018

The service was well-led.

The service had a registered manager who understood the responsibilities of their role. Staff felt well supported by the registered manager.

There was a strong commitment to continuous improvement with quality assurance systems in place.

The provider listened to, and acted on, feedback from people, their relatives and members of the staff team.