Eyam Domiciliary Service Ltd

Updated 6 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.

The inspection site visit took place on 10 and 11 July 2018, and was a comprehensive inspection. We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection visit because the location provides domiciliary care for people in their own homes. We needed to be sure that someone from the service would be in. The inspection team consisted of one inspector and an expert by experience. An expert by experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

The inspection site visit activity started on 10 July and ended on 11 July 2018. We visited the office location on those dates to see the registered manager and staff, and to review care records and policies and procedures. We conducted telephone interviews with people and relatives on 12 and 13 July 2018.

Before our inspection visit we reviewed the information we held about the service, including notifications the provider sent us. A notification is information about important events which the service is required to send us by law. For example, incidents resulting in serious injuries, or allegations of abuse. We sought the views of local authority commissioning teams. Commissioners are people who work to find appropriate care and support services, which are paid for by the local authority or by a health clinical commissioning group. We also spoke with Healthwatch Derbyshire, who are an independent organisation that represents people using health and social care services.

On this occasion we did not ask the provider to send us a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. However, we offered the provider the opportunity to share information they felt relevant with us.

During the inspection we spoke with seven people who used the service and spoke with four relatives. We spoke with three care staff, one office staff member, and the registered manager. We sought the views of two health and social care professionals. We looked at a range of records related to how the service was managed. These included six people's care records, two staff recruitment and training files, and the provider's quality auditing system.

Updated 6 September 2018

Eyam Domiciliary Service Ltd is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses. It provides a service to older people, people living with dementia, and people living with physical disabilities. Not everyone using Eyam Domiciliary Service Ltd receives regulated activity; CQC only inspects the service being received by people receiving ‘personal care’; help with tasks relating to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also take into account and wider social care provided. At the time of our inspection, 69 people were receiving personal care. Eyam Domiciliary Service Ltd provides this service to people living in the Hope, Hathersage, Bakewell, Calver and Curbar areas of North Derbyshire.

The service had a registered manager at the time of our inspection visit. 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.

Eyam Domiciliary Service Ltd was previously registered with CQC at a different address, where they were inspected and rated as Good in February 2016. This report relates to the first inspection of the service at this current address.

People were supported with their personal care in ways which kept them safe. Risks to people's safety from their health conditions and environment were identified and mitigated. Appropriate measures were put in place to minimise the risk of avoidable harm, whilst promoting independence. Staff knew how to identify if people were at risk of abuse and were confident to report concerns. People's medicines were managed safely.

People and relatives were happy with staff who provided personal care. People had enough staff to support them at the times they needed. Staff were knowledgeable about people's care needs. The provider acted to ensure that staff were suitable to work with people before they provided care. Staff were trained, supervised and supported to provide people's care.

People's personal care needs were assessed and provided in line with current legislation and nationally recognised guidelines. Staff had the skills, experience and knowledge to meet people’s individual needs. The provider supported staff to work alongside health and social care professionals to ensure people’s needs were assessed and met effectively. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. The policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People were involved in planning and reviewing their care. Their care was tailored to meet their individual needs and wishes. People were supported in ways which promoted respect, their dignity, and independence. People, relatives, and staff felt able to raise concerns or suggestions in relation to the quality of care. The provider had a complaints procedure to ensure that any issues with quality of care were addressed.

The service was well-led. Everyone we spoke with was positive about the way the service was managed. The provider promoted an open and inclusive culture within the service, and staff had clear guidance on the standards of care expected of them. The provider had systems to monitor the quality of the service provided and ensured people received safe and effective care. This included seeking and responding to feedback from people to inform the standard of care. Checks were undertaken on all aspects of personal care provision so that action could be taken to improve the quality of the service.