You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 30 June 2018

We carried out this announced site inspection on the 1, 5 and 7 June 2018.

The registered manager was given 48 hours' notice of the inspection as we needed to be sure that the office was open and staff would be available to speak with us.

This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats. It provides a service to older adults. Not everyone using Coast Home Care receives a regulated activity; CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also take into account any wider social care provided.

At the time of our inspection, 14 people were supported with their personal care needs by the service.

Coast Home Care was registered in March 2017. This was their first New Approach Inspection and rating.

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 and their relatives placed great value on the friendships that they developed with staff. They felt that staff went beyond all expectations in the care and support that staff provided. Staff would often visit people on their day off to say hello and to spend social time with them.

People were positive about the care provided by the service and said that they felt safe receiving care in their homes. One person said, “Amazing staff, make sure I’m safe and check my life line button before they leave.” Staff recognised the signs of potential abuse and knew the reporting system to keep people safe. People were placed at the centre of their care and their risks were assessed and reviewed regularly to ensure care remained appropriate to meet their needs. There were sufficient numbers of trained staff who had the appropriate recruitment checks to ensure they were suitable for their role. Staff arrived on time for their visits and the right numbers of staff were available to provide the support people needed. People received their medicines as prescribed by staff who had been assessed as competent to give people’s medicines safely.

People and their relatives were involved in all decisions about how they wanted their care and support needs met. People spoke positively about the relationships they had with staff. Staff ensured people consented to the care they received and were aware of how to respect people's choices and rights. People were supported to have sufficient to eat and drink and were encouraged to have a balanced diet. People were supported to access healthcare services when required. People told us staff had the skills and knowledge required to support them. Staff had received training relevant to their role.

People said staff went above and beyond what was expected from them. People and their relatives told us staff and the management team as being extremely kind, caring and friendly. People were placed at the centre of their care and people told us they felt listened to by the staff who supported them. People told us staff always respected their privacy and dignity when providing care and where supported to develop their independence. One person said, “They are very polite and respectful, always encouraging when I need it.”

People were encouraged to give their feedback and views about the quality of the service they received. Communication systems used to share information about people's care and support needs ensured that staff were responsive to any changes. There were systems in place to record and investigate concerns with details of the investigation and outcomes. This meant people were assured concerns and issues were dealt with appropriately. People were enc

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 30 June 2018

Coast Home Care was safe.

People told us that they felt safe. Staff understood how to respond to suspected abuse.

Care plans and risk assessments were in place to manage risks to people. Where accidents and incidents occurred, staff responded appropriately to reduce further risks.

People received their medicines safely, from appropriately trained staff.

The provider carried out appropriate checks on new staff to ensure they were suitable before they started work. There were sufficient numbers of staff to meet people�s needs.

Effective

Good

Updated 30 June 2018

Coast Home Care was effective.

People were supported by staff who had the skills and knowledge to meet their care and support needs. Staff received training and on-going support from the registered manager.

People�s rights were protected as staff asked for their consent before providing care. People were supported to have sufficient to eat and drink to maintain their health. Staff monitored and responded to people�s health needs when required.

Caring

Good

Updated 30 June 2018

Coast Home Care was caring.

Staff exceeded expectations to ensure that people were treated with kindness and compassion. Friendships developed between people and staff and the focus from staff was on ensuring that people�s emotional as well as personal needs were being met.

People felt that staff always treated them with dignity and respect and we saw that this was the case.

People were able to express their opinions about the service and were involved in the decisions about their care.

Care was centred on people's individual needs. Staff maintained kind and caring relationships with people.

Responsive

Good

Updated 30 June 2018

Coast Home Care was responsive.

The service was responsive.

The service was responsive to people�s needs. Care records were personalised and accurately documented people�s requirements, likes and dislikes. People were involved in all aspects of their care planning and were supported by staff who understood their needs. Effective communication systems were used to share information. People were encouraged to give their views about the service provided. People knew how to raise concerns and said they would be confident any issues raised would be taken seriously.

Well-led

Good

Updated 30 June 2018

The service was well-led.

There was a positive and open culture within the organisation and everyone said the service was very well- led. The provider actively sought people�s views and strived to deliver the best possible care to people. Staff were proud to work for the service and were very motivated. Everyone said the culture of the service was open and friendly. The provider had quality audit systems in place to check the health and safety of people and there was an emphasis on continually learning and improving the quality of service delivered.