About the service:

Violet Care Agency Limited is a domiciliary care agency providing personal care to people in their own homes. Some people received long term care whilst some people were provided with short term care packages aimed at supporting them to regain independence. At the time of inspection there were 44 people using the service.

People’s experience of using this service:

The service benefited from a dedicated management team who were committed to providing a good service. Lessons were learned when things went wrong to continuously drive improvements.

There were sufficient numbers of staff who had been safely recruited to meet people’s needs. However, some people expressed dissatisfaction with the timing of their care calls and experienced late visits which were not always well communicated.

Risks to people had been assessed and staff knew what to do to keep people safe from avoidable harm. People were supported to take their medicines in a safe way by staff who had been trained and assessed as competent.

Care and support was planned and delivered to promote people's safety and welfare. Staff had access to up to date information on how to support people safely and effectively in the way that they preferred.

Training, supervision and observations of staff competence was undertaken to support staff and check they had the skills and knowledge to be competent in their job role and support people effectively. However, these systems and processes required formalising to ensure consistency.

We made a recommendation about the supervision and appraisal process.

Staff were kind and caring and often went the extra mile to meet people’s needs. Staff were polite and respectful and treated people with dignity.

There were systems in place to respond to complaints and concerns which were managed appropriately and in a timely manner.

People’s opinion of the service was regularly sought and used to drive improvements and promote people’s satisfaction with the service they received.

Rating at last inspection:

Service inspected July 2018 but not rated due to insufficient evidence to make a judgement.

Why we inspected:

This was a planned inspection to provide the service with a rating. The rating now given is Good.

Follow up:

We will continue to monitor the service through the information we receive.

This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats in the community. This was the first inspection of the service since it became operational on the 07 July 2017. The service is registered to personal care to people living in their own homes. At the time of our inspection there were 14 people using the service, but 13 of these had only very recently began to use the service. This meant although we could carry out an inspection, we did not have enough information about the experiences of people using the service to give a rating to each of the five questions, and an overall rating for the service.

The service had 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.

There were enough staff to meet people's needs and staff had been recruited safely. People told us staff turned up on time and told them if they were delayed.

Risks to people were appropriately assessed and risk assessments were relevant to people's environment and needs. We have made a recommendation that recording practices around risk were strengthened. Staff reduced the risk of infection by using personal protective equipment.

Individual needs were assessed and care plans were developed to identify what care and support people required. People received appropriate support with eating, drinking and their healthcare needs. Referrals were made to community health and social care professionals when appropriate, to meet people's needs and manage their risks. The service was not currently supporting people with medicine administration but processes were in place if this was required.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way; the policies and systems at the service supported this practice.

Staff received an effective induction and a comprehensive programme of face to face training had been provided. People supported and their relatives felt staff had the knowledge and skills to meet people's needs.

People said they were involved in their care planning and were happy to express their views or raise concerns. Care plans contained initial information but more time was required to ensure they contained person centred information. People received care from staff who they considered to be friendly and caring, and who stayed long enough to provide the care people required. Staff we spoke promoted people's privacy and dignity and provided people with care and support which was individual to them.

The registered manager and staff were committed to providing a high-quality service to people. There were effective quality assurance processes in place, however we were unable to see these completed due to the timescales of people using the service. The registered manager contacted people by telephone to gain feedback and information about their initial experience of using the service.