We carried out a review of the data available to us about Doris Jones Limited on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Doris Jones Limited, you can give feedback on this service.
Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also consider any wider social care provided.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found.
People and their relatives told us the service provided excellent care and staff went above and beyond their expectation. One person said, “I love [staff member], they cheer me up when I am grumpy, make my house look lovely, nothing gets forgotten, they are brilliant, plump my cushions, get water and rearranges the plants.” A family member told us, “Every aspect of [relative’s] care has been outstanding; punctuality; reliability; professionalism; cheerfulness and kindness. We, as a family, have been immensely impressed and the reward has been my [relative’s] remarkable recovery.” Another said, “[Relative] has the same staff five times per week. They know exactly what they need. I can’t fault them, [name of staff member] knows how to support them and it reassures me.”
The management of the service was exceptional and went above and beyond its remit to provide a well led service. The management team, led by an experienced and passionate registered manager, provided an excellent quality service where people were at the forefront of their care. Staff were highly supported and valued for the energy and enthusiasm they bought to their work.
People and their relatives had trust and confidence in the staff and management which exceeded their expectations. Everyone, without exception, said they would recommend the service to others.
Staff responded to people in a person-centred way, providing individualised care and support. People had received respectful and sensitive end of life care.
People told us they felt very safe with the staff. People appreciated the continuity of care from the same care staff who were punctual and attentive. People were actively encouraged and supported by the staff to take informed risks which increased their independence, autonomy and sense of worth
Safe staff recruitment practices were followed to ensure staff had sound values and the personality and aptitude for carrying out their role. Staff were provided with the skills and knowledge through an effective and individualised training programme to meet their different learning needs.
People received their medicines as prescribed. People confirmed that staff followed infection control procedures and wore gloves and aprons appropriately to prevent the spread of infection.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests. People were fully involved as partners in their care. Consent was always obtained before care was provided. Staff were exceptionally caring, kind and compassionate and treated people with dignity and respect.
The service worked in collaboration with health and social care professionals and the community to promote joined up care. The service was increasingly proactive in recognising social exclusion and isolation and involved people in the life of the community.
People and their relatives were confident that if they had concerns or complaints, they would be dealt with appropriately. People had information in their preferred format based on their sensory and communication needs.
Systems were in place to monitor the delivery of care through audits, spot checks, staff observational supervision and quality assurance questionnaires. Lessons learned were documented, analysed and shared with the management team and staff to make the service a leading social care provider.
Rating at last inspection. The last rating for this service was Good (published 7 October 2016).
Why we inspected. This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Doris Jones Limited is a care agency that is registered to provide personal care to people within their own homes. The service is based in Leigh on Sea in Essex and covers the surrounding areas. The agency offers a range of support and rehabilitation services.
The service has 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.
The service was exceptional in their responsive approach to providing care to people. People were involved in their care provision and actively encouraged to feed into the service they received. The registered manager and staff were committed to a strong person centred culture and offered a ‘bespoke’ service. The service found ways to empower people to be involved in development and day to day running of the service. People lived full lives and the service always found ways to support people with their favourite pastimes or other things, like their favourite meals. Healthcare professionals spoke highly of the support provided by the service and how they worked with them to ensure people received a personalised service.
Kindness, respect, compassion and dignity were key principles on which the service was built and values that were reflected in the day-to-day practice of the service. People said they had been treated with dignity and respect and that staff provided their care in a kind and caring manner. Assessments had been carried out and care plans had been clearly developed around each individual’s needs and preferences. People were supported by staff to maintain good healthcare and where needed they would assist them to gain access or contact a range of healthcare providers.
There was strong emphasis on continual improvement and best practice which benefited people and staff. There were robust systems to assure quality and identify any potential improvements to the service. This meant people benefited from a constantly improving service that they were at the heart of. The service had an effective quality assurance system and had regular contact with people who used the service. People felt listened to and that their views and opinions had been sought. The quality assurance system was effective and improvements had been made as a result of learning from people’s views and opinions.
The registered manager promoted strong values and a person centred culture. Staff were proud to work for the service and were supported in understanding the values of the agency.
Staff showed a good knowledge of safeguarding procedures and were clear about the actions they would take to help protect people. Risk assessments had been completed to help staff to support people with everyday risks and help to keep them safe. These had been regularly reviewed to ensure both staff and people who received a service were kept safe. Systems were in place to assist people with the management of their medication and help ensure people received their medication as prescribed and they received the support they needed.
There were safe and robust recruitment procedures to help ensure that people received their support from staff of suitable character. Recruitment checks had been carried out before staff started work to ensure that they were suitable to work in a care setting. There were sufficient staff available, with the right competencies, skills and experience to help meet the needs of the people who used the service. Staff told us that they felt well supported to carry out their work and had received regular supervision and training.
People knew who to raise complaints or concerns to. The service had a clear complaints procedure in place and people had been provided with this information as part of their assessment. This included information on the process and also any timespan for response. We saw that complaints had been appropriately investigated and recorded.
One person we spoke with said, "The carers are very good and go that extra mile. They all have a nice way about them and encourage my independence and don't rush me at all."
People were protected against the risks of a health care related infection because staff had been trained appropriately and wore personal protective equipment to reduce the risk of cross contamination. Staff had been trained in food hygiene, infection control and hand washing techniques.
Staff were supported with relevant training, supervision and appraisal. New staff received induction training and their competency was checked before providing care to people in their own homes. The provider undertook 'spot checks' regularly to ensure that care was of a consistent standard. Annual appraisals took place for all staff.
The provider had an effective system to manage complaints. Records of complaints that we viewed reflected that they had been investigated and handled in line with their policy. Where areas for improvement had been identified these were cascaded to staff for future learning.