You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 2 June 2017

We carried out this inspection on 9 May 2017. The inspection was announced. We gave the provider 48 hours’ of this inspection because we needed to be sure that someone would be available to support us with the inspection process.

At the last inspection in February 2016, the service was rated ‘Good’. At this inspection we found that the service remained ‘Good’.

We carried out this inspection due to high number of safeguarding concerns that we had received about the service and how it was being managed.

Felicity Care provides home care services to people living in their own homes. At the time of the inspection the service provided personal care and support to 56 people.

People and relatives told us that they felt safe and happy with the care and support that they received from care staff from Felicity Care.

Care staff understood the term ‘safeguarding’ and were able to list the different types of abuse that people could experience. Care staff clearly demonstrated the actions they would take if they suspected that people they supported were being abused.

The provider had a variety of systems in place to ensure people were kept safe and free from harm. This included individualised risk assessments, robust recruitment procedures and safe processes to ensure the safe administration of medicines.

Sufficient staff were available to meet people’s needs. People and relatives confirmed they received care from regular and consistent staff with whom they had established positive and caring relationships.

Staff received induction and regular training to enable them to carry out their role effectively. In addition to this, staff confirmed that they also received regular supervision and an annual appraisal which supported them in their role.

Care plans contained consent forms that had been signed by people and relatives consenting to the care and support that they received from Felicity Care. Where possible, people were encouraged and supported to make choices and express their preferences in the least restrictive way possible. Policies and systems in place supported this practise.

People were supported with their nutritional, hydration and health care needs where this had been identified as an assessed need.

Care plans were detailed and person centred and clearly outlined the person’s needs and requirements as per their choice and preference. However, we did note that the provider did not always follow a consistent approach with all care plans that we saw. Care plans did not always include records of people’s likes and dislikes as well as some background information..

People and relatives knew the registered manager and felt able to raise any concerns or complaints and were confident that these would be dealt with and resolved appropriately. However, some people and social care professionals had raised concerns about the registered managers approach when issues or concerns were raised.

The registered manager had a number of systems in place which enabled the service to assess, monitor and improve the quality of care provision. This included spot checks of staff whilst at work and customer satisfaction surveys. However, some feedback from social care professionals that had been received and feedback from one person suggested that the registered manager was not always positive in their approach.

Further information about our findings is detailed in the sections below.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 2 June 2017

The service remains Good.

Effective

Good

Updated 2 June 2017

The service remains Good.

Caring

Good

Updated 2 June 2017

The service remains Good.

Responsive

Good

Updated 2 June 2017

The service remains Good.

Well-led

Requires improvement

Updated 2 June 2017

The service was not always well-led. Satisfaction surveys had not been analysed or responded to where concerns or issues had been noted in order to learn from and make improvements.

Quality checks carried out by the registered manager were not always formally recorded so that these could be analysed in order to identify any emerging trends and patterns and as a result learn from and make improvements.

Most people and relatives were very positive about the registered manager and the service that they received. However, some feedback from social care professionals that had been received and feedback from one person suggested that the registered manager was not always positive in their approach.

Care staff told us they were well supported by the registered manager who was always available whenever they required.