Archived: Trust Life Care

Updated 4 December 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 announced inspection took place on 28 September, and the 2 and 4 October 2018.

We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection visit because it is small and the manager is often out of the office supporting staff or providing care. We needed to be sure that they would be in. At the time of the inspection there were 29 people using the service.

We used information the provider sent us in the Provider Information Return. This is information we require providers to send us at least once annually to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

Prior to the inspection we gathered feedback from the local authority commissioners, and reviewed statutory notifications sent to us by the provider. These are notifications of significant events providers are obliged to send us.

The inspection was carried out by one adult social care inspector. During our inspection we spoke with three people who used the service and two relatives of people who used the service. We also spoke with five members of staff including the registered manager and care staff. We reviewed documents relating to people’s care and other documents relevant to the running of the service. This included four care plans, five staff personnel files, risk assessments, quality audits and training records.

Updated 4 December 2018

We inspected Trust Life Care on 28 September, and 2 and 4 October 2018. We gave the provider 48 hours notice to make sure someone would be in the office. At our last inspection we rated the service as requires improvement, with one breach of Regulation 17 (Good Governance) of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. At this inspection we found the service had made the required improvements and was no longer in breach of the regulation.

This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats in the community. It provides a service to older adults and younger disabled adults.

Not everyone using Trust Life Care receives regulated activity; CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also take into account any wider social care provided.

There was a registered manager in post at the time of the inspection. 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.

Everyone we spoke with felt the service was safe. Staff had received training in safeguarding vulnerable adults and were able to describe how they would protect people from harm. In one instance we saw how staff used a process to protect someone from financial abuse.

There were enough staff to meet people’s needs. There were no missed visits and people told us staff were generally on time and punctual. At the time of the inspection, the service was recruiting new staff due to absence and staff who had left. The service was using two regular agency members of staff and had recently recruited a deputy manager and care worker.

Medicines were managed safely. Staff received training and competency assessments before they helped people with their medicines. Where necessary, staff received specialised training to meet the needs of people who required support with more complex medicines. Medicine administration records were well written and notes from staff demonstrated good medicines knowledge.

Staff received training, and people told us staff were competent to meet their needs. Staff told us they felt well supported through induction and supervisions.

People were supported to eat and drink enough to maintain their wellbeing, and staff were knowledgeable about people’s dietary preferences. Staff recorded people’s food and fluid intake where necessary. Staff also worked in partnership with other health and social care agencies to monitor people’s health.

People and their relatives gave positive feedback about staff’s attitude. They told us staff were kind and caring. We observed good interactions between people and staff. Staff knew how to protect people’s privacy and dignity, and people we spoke with said staff were sensitive to their needs and feelings.

Care plans were written in a person centred way with good detailed information on how to meet people’s needs. Care plans were reviewed either annually, or in response to a change in need such as decline in mobility, or other necessary reason.

The service had not received any complaints since our last inspection. There were policies and procedures in place, and people told us they were confident they could raise any issues they had.

The service did not always manage records well. We found the training and supervision matrix were out of date, and a quality assurance file was missing. However, staff we spoke with felt well supported and there was other evidence which demonstrated staff training was up to date. We have made a recommendation about the management of records.

The service had improved its quality monitoring arrangements. Audits of medicine administration records were effective, as we noted improvement in the quality of medicines records at this inspection.

The service did not conduct formal feedback for people using the service, however the registered manager often delivered care in person and people told us they could always go to them with any issues they had.

Staff told us there was an open culture and the registered manager was approachable. Staff recommended the service as a place to work or receive care.