You are here

We are carrying out a review of quality at Harmony Care & Support Ltd. We will publish a report when our review is complete. Find out more about our inspection reports.

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 1 March 2017

We inspected this service on 31 January and 1 February 2017. This was an announced inspection and we telephoned the week prior to our inspection in order to arrange home visits and telephone interviews with people. The service provides care in people’s homes to older people and people with debilitating illness and long term conditions such as dementia. The service is available in the Long Eaton and surrounding Derby area. At the time of the inspection 163 people were being supported by the service.

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.

Our last inspection took place in March 2016 and at that time we asked the provider to make improvements in communication, effective systems to monitor the service and develop improvements. At this inspection we saw the appropriate improvements had been made.

The provider had a range of audits to monitor the service provided and make improvements where needed. For example, new methods were in place to communicate information to staff and maintain their safety.

Staff felt supported and received training for their role. Care plans were completed with the person so their preferences and choices could be included. People received a review of their care and they had the opportunity to comments on the service they received. There was a complaints policy and any complaints were investigated and addressed.

People felt safe and received care that had been risk assessed to ensure measures were taken to reduce any risks. When people received support with their meals they were given choices. When they required assistance with medicines this was risk assessed and the administration was completed safety.

There was sufficient staff and people were informed who would be attending weekly. People made decisions about their care and when they lacked capacity an assessment was completed to support decision in their best interest.

People received care from staff who respected them. When they contacted the office with any changes or additional support this was supported. The manager understood their responsibilities and notified us of any concerns or incidents. The home had displayed their rating conspicuously in the office and on the website.

Inspection areas



Updated 1 March 2017

The service was safe.

Staff understood their responsibilities to keep people safe from harm. Risks assessments had been completed and provided guidance to reduce any risk. The recruitment practices in place checked staff’s suitability to work with people. There were enough staff to provide the level of support required to maintain a consistent service for people. People received their medicines as prescribed and staff had been trained to know how to manage them safely



Updated 1 March 2017

The service was effective

Staff were trained to support people’s needs and new staff received an induction to enable them to be confident in their role. When people lacked capacity they were supported by the relevant people to support the decisions they needed to make. People received a choice of meals and were encouraged to maintain their independence. People were supported to maintain their health and wellbeing with ongoing healthcare support.



Updated 1 March 2017

The service was caring

People had positive, caring relationships with the staff. The support people received meet their needs and encouraged them to maintain their independence. People’s privacy and dignity was respected.



Updated 1 March 2017

The service was responsive

People’s preferences had been considered so that they received the care they required and in the way they wished to receive it. The service was flexible to people’s changing needs. The provider responded to any complaints in line with their policy.



Updated 1 March 2017

The service was welled.

People had an opportunity to comment on the service and any concerns were addressed.

The provider had a range of systems to maintain and make improvements to the quality of the service they delivered. The provider had invested in new systems to support the safety of staff and provide a modern approach to shared information. Staff felt supported and received guidance when they needed it.