You are here

Archived: St.Mary's Healthcare and Recruitment Good

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 18 December 2018

The inspection was carried out on 14 November 2018, and was an announced inspection.

St. Mary’s Healthcare and Recruitment is a domiciliary care agency registered to provide personal care for people who require support in their own home. CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’ and help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also take into account any wider social care provided. This was the first comprehensive inspection since the service was registered on 14 February 2018. At the time of our inspection, the service was supporting one elderly person.

The provider was also the registered manager at the service. 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 provider had suitable processes in place to safeguard people from different forms of abuse. They knew what their responsibilities were in relation to keeping people safe from the risk of abuse should any incident arise. The provider and staff recognised the signs of abuse and what to look out for. There were systems in place to support staff and people to stay safe.

The provider had involved people in planning their care by assessing their needs on their first visit to the person, and then by asking the person if they were happy with the care they received. There was a strong emphasis on person centred care. People were supported to plan their support and they received a service that was based on their personal needs and wishes. The service was flexible and responded positively to changes in the person’s needs. People were supported by their family members to discuss their care needs, if this was their choice to do so. One person told us they were able to express their opinions and views and were encouraged and supported to have their voice heard.

People were supported with meal planning, preparation, eating and drinking as needed. Staff supported people, and would contact family members and/or the office to alert the provider to any identified health needs so that their doctor or nurse could be informed.

Staff provided caring and considerate support and respected people’s privacy and dignity.

At this time, the service did not provide care and support to people who were at the end stages of life.

The provider had followed effective recruitment procedures to check that potential staff employed were of good character and had the skills and experience needed to carry out their roles.

The provider deployed sufficient numbers of staff to meet people’s needs and provide a flexible service.

Staff had received training to enable them to carry out the duties they were employed to perform. All staff received induction training at the start of their employment. Refresher training was provided at regular intervals.

Staff followed an up to date medicines policy issued by the provider and they were checked against this and assessed by the provider.

Management systems were in use to minimise the risks from the spread of infection. Staff received training about controlling infection and had access to personal protective equipment like disposable gloves and apron’s.

Staff received regular supervision and an annual appraisal so they were supported to carry out their roles.

People said that they knew they could contact the provider at any time, and they felt confident about raising any concerns or other issues.

The provider had processes in place to monitor the delivery of the service. As well as talking to the provider at spot checks, people could phone the office at any time, or speak to the provider for out of hours calls. People’s views were obtained through meetings with people and meetings with the relati

Inspection areas



Updated 18 December 2018

The service was safe.

People experienced a service that made them feel safe. Staff knew what they should do to identify and raise safeguarding concerns.

Staffing levels were flexible and determined by the person�s needs. Robust recruitment procedures ensured people were only supported by staff deemed suitable and safe to work with them.

General and individual health and risks were assessed.

Systems were in place so that medicines could be administered safely when needed.



Updated 18 December 2018

The service was effective.

People�s needs were assessed.

People was cared for by staff who knew their needs well.

Staff encouraged people to eat and drink enough.

Staff met with the provider to discuss their work performance. Staff received on-going training and regular supervision.



Updated 18 December 2018

The service was caring.

People had good relationships with staff so that they were comfortable and felt well treated.

People were treated as individuals and able to make choices about their care.

People had been involved in planning their care and their views were taken into account.

People were treated with dignity and respect. Staff understood how to maintain people�s privacy.



Updated 18 December 2018

The service was responsive.

People received care that was based on their needs and preferences. They were involved in all aspects of their care and were supported to lead their lives in the way they wished to.

The service was flexible and responded quickly to people�s changing needs or wishes.

Information about people was updated with their involvement so that staff were aware of the person�s current needs.

People�s views and opinions were sought and listened to.



Updated 18 December 2018

The provider operated systems and policies that were focused on the quality of service delivery.

There were structures in place to monitor and review the risks that may present themselves as the service was delivered.

There was an open and positive culture which focused on people. The provider sought people and staff�s feedback.

The provider maintained quality assurance and monitoring procedures in order to provide an on-going assessment of how the service was functioning; and to act on the results to bring about improved services.