We carried out a review of the data available to us about Dover 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 Dover, you can give feedback on this service.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
People’s experience of using this service:
People were supported by caring and compassionate staff who knew them well. People were involved in planning their care, initially through a comprehensive assessment which was followed by regular reviews.
Staff build positive relationships with people and their loved ones. Loved ones told us that staff ensured they were well too and provided a support for them.
People’s care plans gave staff clear guidance about how to meet their needs in the way they preferred. This included information about the support people required with eating and drinking. Staff supported people to stay well and contacted health professionals when required. There were enough staff to meet people’s needs and they had the training and support required to carry out their roles. People were supported to maintain or regain their independence. Staff were flexible and took on additional tasks for people, such as changing light bulbs or collecting prescriptions.
There was a complaints procedure in place, no complaints had been received since the last inspection. There was a clear vision and set of values at the service which focussed on people getting high quality care the way they wanted it. People, relatives and staff told us they could always contact the office and get help or support when they needed it. The registered manager stayed up to date with changes in practice and legislation by accessing relevant websites. Regular audits were completed, and feedback was sought from people and professionals. Any shortfalls were used for learning and shared with staff.
Rating at last inspection: Good (Published November 2016).
Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the rating at the last inspection. We found the service continued to meet the characteristics of Good in all areas. The rating continues to be Good.
Follow up: We will continue to monitor the service.
Dover care agency provides care services to people in their own homes in and around Dover in Kent. The care they provided was tailored to people’s needs so that people could maintain or regain their independence. This included older people who had been discharged from hospital who needed help with day-to-day tasks like cooking, shopping, washing and dressing and help to maintain their health and wellbeing. Staff also supported multi agency approach to dignified end of life care with other health and social care professionals. There were 27 people using the service.
There was a registered manager employed 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. However, the service was managed day-to-day by a service manager.
People spoke about the staff in a positive light regarding their feelings of being safe and well cared for. They thought that staff were caring and compassionate. Staff were trusted and well thought of by the people they cared for.
The service manager was supported to manage the service by a care supervisor. They assessed people’s needs and planned people’s care to maintain their safety, health and wellbeing. Risks were assessed by staff to protect people. There were systems in place to monitor incidents and accidents.
Staff had received training about protecting people from abuse and showed a good understanding of what their responsibilities were in preventing abuse. Procedures for reporting any concerns were in place. The service manager knew how and when they should escalate concerns following the local authorities safeguarding protocols.
The service manager and staff had received training about the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and understood when and how to support peoples best interest if they lacked capacity to make certain decisions about their care.
Working in community settings staff often had to work on their own, but they were provided with good support and an ‘Outside Office Hours’ number to call during evenings and at weekends if they had concerns about people. The service could continue to run in the event of emergencies arising so that people’s care would continue. For example, when there was heavy snow or if there was a power failure at the main office.
Staff were recruited safely and had been through a selection process that ensured they were fit to work with people who needed safeguarding. Recruitment policies were in place that had been followed. Safe recruitment practices included background and criminal records checks prior to staff starting work.
People felt that staff were well trained and understood their needs. They told us that staff looked at their care plans and followed the care as required. People told us that staff discussed their care with them so that they could decide how it would be delivered.
Staff had been trained to administer medicines safely and the service manager checked staff administered medicines safely.
The service manager gave staff guidance about supporting people to eat and drink enough. People were pleased that staff encouraged them to keep healthy through eating a balanced diet and drinking enough fluids. Care plans were kept reviewed and updated.
There were policies in place, which ensured people would be listened to and treated fairly if they complained. The service manager ensured that people’s care met their most up to date needs and any issues raised were dealt with to people’s satisfaction.
There was very low staff turnover. Staff felt well supported by service manager and the care supervisor. People and staff were happy with the leadership and approachability of the service’s service manager and the providers of the service. The providers often visited the service, attended staff meetings and also went out and delivered care if needed. They had a clear quality based vision of the service they wanted to provide and understood how to achieve this. Audits were effective and risks were monitored by service manager to keep people safe.
We found that individual care plans were in place to make sure people were receiving the care they needed. Suitable arrangements were in place to make sure medication was managed and administered safely. People using the service said that the staff were reliable, arrived on time and stayed the full duration of the call. People said: 'The carers support me well; in fact they do considerable more'.
Staff recruitment records showed that new staff had been checked to make sure they were suitable to work with vulnerable people. Systems were in place to monitor the service that people received to ensure that the service was satisfactory and safe.
People told us they did not have any complaints but would not hesitate to speak to the manger or staff if they had any concerns.
We spoke with the manager and one member of the senior staff at the time of our visit to the office and also spoke with three care workers over the telephone.
We telephoned 15 people to discuss the care they were receiving from the agency and visited three people in their homes. People spoke positively about their care workers and felt that they fully supported their care needs. All of the people we talked with told us that they were treated with respect and kindness.
People who used the service spoke positively about the staff and felt that they were fully supported with their care needs. People said that all the staff were polite and respected their privacy and dignity.
People spoken with told us that their care was personalised to their needs and said that staff always asked what they would like to be called.
People were aware of their care plans and confirmed that they, and sometimes their family read the daily notes. They said that they had received information about the service when their care first started and someone from the office had visited them to discuss their care and what they needed to be done.
People told us that they thought the staff received training and most of them knew what they were doing.
People said they were happy with the service they received.
People who use the service told us they received care from regular staff that were trained to do their jobs well. They said they felt safe in their homes and staff were polite, flexible and reliable. They told us they had the equipment they needed and received their medicines safely. They felt that the staff listened to their concerns and were happy to raise complaints if they needed to. They said that the service carried out checks to make sure they were satisfied with the care being provided.