You are here

Lucmont Limited t/a Home Instead Senior Care Good

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


Inspection carried out on 10 May 2018

During a routine inspection

Lucmont Limited t/a Home Instead Senior Care is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats. It is registered to provide a service to older people, people living with dementia and people with mental health needs. Not everyone using Lucmont Limited t/a Home Instead Senior Care received a regulated activity; the Care Quality Commission (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.

This inspection was carried out between 10 and 14 May 2018 and was an announced inspection. This is the first inspection of this service under its current registration. At the time of our inspection there were 96 people using the service.

The service had a registered manager. 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 received a safe service. Staff had a good understanding of safeguarding procedures and keeping people safe. The registered manager’s response to accidents and incidents helped reduce the potential for any recurrence. The staff recruitment process helped ensure that the necessary checks were completed before new staff commenced their employment. There was a sufficient number of staff in post who were provided with the training and skills they needed to provide people with safe care and support. People's medicines were administered and managed safely.

People received an effective service that took account of their independence. Staff knew how to promote people’s independence. People were supported to make decisions that benefitted their wellbeing by staff who knew what decisions each person could make. People's care plans included sufficient detail of their assessed needs and the amount of support they required from staff. Risks to people were identified, and plans were put into place to promote their safety in a way which gave people freedom of choice.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. People benefitted from the support and care that trained and skilled staff provided. This helped to promote people's safety and independence. Staff were regularly reminded of their responsibilities in meeting each person’s individual needs. The registered manager used information from regular spot checks of staff’s performance to help staff to maintain and improve their skills. Staff enabled people to access community or other primary health care services. People were supported to eat and drink sufficient quantities of food and fluid.

People received a caring service that was provided with compassion. This was by staff who ensured people’s privacy and dignity was promoted. Staff respected people’s rights to be cared for in an unhurried and considerate manner. People's independence was promoted by staff who encouraged people to make their own decisions about their care. People who needed advocacy had this in place and this helped ensure people’s views were considered and acted upon.

People received a responsive service that helped them to have their needs met in a person centred way. Suggestions and concerns were acted upon before they became a complaint. Technology was used to help people to receive care that was timely. Systems were in place to support people to have a dignified death.

People received a well-led service which they were involved in developing. Their views were listened to, considered and acted upon. Staff meetings and communication systems including a