You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 12 September 2018

This inspection took place on 3 and 6 August 2018. This was an announced inspection as Chrome Tree Ltd is a Domiciliary Care Agency (DCA) and we needed to be sure someone would be at the office. A DCA is a provision that offers specific hours of care and support to a person in their own home. The service currently supported 72 people with the regulated activity of personal care, and employed 32 staff on a zero hours contract.

At our last inspection we rated the service good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

At the time of the inspection a registered manager was 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.

The service remained safe. Sufficient staff were employed to manage people’s needs, and enable them to engage in activities of their choice, through appropriate risk management. Staff knew how to safeguard people from abuse and were aware of the protocols to follow should they have concerns. Staff reported that they would not hesitate to whistle-blow if the need arose. Where staff were involved in medicine management, these were managed safely. Staff were competency checked annually and audits were completed to ensure people were kept safe.

The service had improved in the domain of effective. Systems were now in place to ensure records were maintained for any best interest decisions made by the service. Support continued to be delivered by a trained staff team, who were able to respond appropriately to people’s changing needs. Staff were supervised and supported by an effective management team, who made certain they were available to staff at all times. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible.

The service remained caring. Staff were reported to be polite, respectful and ensured they maintained people’s dignity when supporting them. They encouraged open communication and worked on motivating people to increase their independence. Evidence of using systems of communication that reflected the person’s choice was evident. Where concerns had been identified of staff proficiency in English, the service considered ways to make improvements.

The service remained responsive. Care plans were individualised, focusing on people’s specific needs. The service took necessary action to prevent and minimise the potential of social isolation. People and staff were protected from discrimination. Measures were in place to allow people to be treated equally. Systems to monitor and investigate complaints were in place, with detailed records maintained.

The service had developed methods of good governance, that provided real time evaluation of practice. A thorough quality assurance audit was completed annually with an action plan being generated, and followed up on. Feedback was encouraged from people, visitors and stakeholders and used to improve and make changes to the service. We found evidence of compliments and complaints that illustrated transparency in management . The service was well-led.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 12 September 2018

The service remained good.

Effective

Good

Updated 12 September 2018

The service has improved to good.

The service recorded, where applicable, any best interest decisions that were made.

People were involved in making decisions related to their care.

Staff had the necessary skills and training to effectively carry out their duties.

Staff received regular supervision, appraisals and observational checks to ensure effective support was provided to people.

Where applicable people were supported with nutrition and hydration.

Caring

Good

Updated 12 September 2018

The service remained good.

Responsive

Good

Updated 12 September 2018

The service remained good.

Well-led

Good

Updated 12 September 2018

The service remained good.