Archived: Grace Community Care

Updated 12 September 2018

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.’

This inspection took place on the 17th and 21st August 2018. The first date was announced and involved a visit to the service’s main office. The second day involved contacting people who used the service for their views about the support they received. was announced. We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection visit because we needed to be sure that the registered provider was available to assist us.

The inspection team consisted of one Adult Social Care Inspector.

Before our visit, we reviewed all the information we had in relation to the service. This included notifications, comments, concerns and safeguarding information. Our visit involved looking at four care plans, training records, policies and procedures, medication systems and various audits relating to the quality of the service. In addition to this we spoke to two people who used the service. We also spoke to the registered provider and a staff member. Only two staff members are involved in providing care; one of whom is the registered provider.

The service supports people who privately fund their support. The service does not routinely contract with a local authority. Referrals to the service are made through other agencies such as Age Concern.

As part of our inspection, we ask registered providers to complete a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. A PIR was returned to us when we asked.

Updated 12 September 2018

We carried out an inspection of Grace Community Care on the 17 and 21 August 2018. The first visit was announced and included a visit to the service’s office. The second day involved talking to people who used the service.

The last inspection of this service was in August 2015. At that inspection the service was rated as good.

This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses in the community. It provides a service to predominantly older adults. The service at present provides support in the Northwich and Knutsford areas of Cheshire. At the time of our visit, the service provided support with personal care to four people although one person was in hospital at the time of our visit.

The registered provider is also the 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.

The registered provider provided support personally to people and was able to gain an indication of the quality of care provided. This was not always evidenced through recording.

Effective systems were in place to protect people from abuse. Training and procedures were in place to raise any concerns.

Risk assessments were up to date and evaluated. These covered risks faced by people in the support they received as well as risks presented by their home environment.

The agency had sufficient staff to meet the needs of people who used the service. People told us that staff always arrived on time with no calls missed.

No new staff had been recruited since our last visit. Recruitment was found to be satisfactory on that occasion.

People required limited assistance with medication with only prescribed creams being applied by the staff team. Medication records were appropriately signed.

Staff received the training they needed to perform their role. Refresher training in safeguarding had been arranged..

The registered provider was able to supervise the other staff member when two staff members supported people. Formal spot-checks had been completed but not always recorded.

The registered provider was aware of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the implications for people who may lack capacity.

The health needs of people were promoted.

People told us they were treated in a kind and unhurried manner.

People received the information they needed about their support and were able to make choices as a result in line with their wishes.

Assessments captured the main needs of people both in terms of the support required, their communication skills, medical history and social interests. Care plans were person centred and included the preferences of people in how they were to be supported.

While people were not supported by the agency to pursue interests and activities; the registered provider had captured interests so that a point of discussion on interests could be made with people; especially when respite care was being provided in people’s own homes.

A complaints procedure was in place although no complaints had been recorded.

People told us the service was well run and organised.

The registered provider had a clear vision preferring to provide support to a small number of people so that continuity could be achieved and good standards of care maintained.

The registered provider always notified CQC of any adverse events that affected the wellbeing of people who used the service.

Ratings from the last inspection were made available in an open and transparent manner.