We carried out a review of the data available to us about Home Service Complete Care LLP 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 Home Service Complete Care LLP, you can give feedback on this service.
People’s experience of using this service:
People, relatives and staff told us the quality of care was good, that the service was well managed and that they would recommend the service to others. People said, “I always know who is coming and they are always on time. They [staff] are never rushing”, “I am happy with Home Service – I would not want to change” and “I am completely satisfied with the service I get”.
A relative commented, “I have seen a vast improvement [in my loved one] since we have been using carers. Using Home Service has made a big difference to us as a family”.
All the people we spoke with said they felt safe with staff from Home Service Complete Care LLP coming in to support them.
People continued to be protected from abuse, harm and discrimination and were supported by a team of regular staff who they trusted.
Risks to people were assessed, monitored and regularly reviewed. Staff followed the guidance provided to help people remain safe in their homes.
People’s physical, mental, emotional and social needs were assessed and monitored to support people to remain as healthy as possible and help promote a good quality of life.
People were encouraged to remain as independent as possible and were supported to have maximum choice and control over their life.
People told us the staff were considerate, kind and caring. One person said, “They are my angels of mercy”.
People told us they trusted the staff and valued their relationship.
People received care which had been tailored to their specific requirements. When people’s needs changed the records were updated straight away and staff were informed.
People knew how to complain and were given opportunities to feedback about their care. All the people we spoke with said they did not have any complaints about the service they received.
The service continued to be well-led. All the people and staff we spoke with felt the service was well-managed.
Regular checks and audits continued to be completed and people were asked to provide feedback about the service they received.
The service met the characteristics of Good in all areas. For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection: Good when we inspected on 18 October 2016 (report published 16 November 2016)
Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the rating at the last inspection. The service maintained Good in all areas and Good overall.
Follow up: We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received, we may inspect sooner.
The service was last inspected in January 2014 when we found the provider was compliant with the essential standards described in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2010.
Home Service Complete Care provides domiciliary care for people of all ages and abilities who live in their own home. Most people received personal care and support through several visits each day. On the day of our inspection visit the service was providing personal care and support to 115 people. Other people the service supported only received domestic support.
The service had a registered manager, who was also part owner of 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. We refer to the registered manager as the manager in the body of this report.
People felt safe using the service and there were processes to minimise risks to people’s safety. These included procedures to manage identified risks with people’s care and for managing people’s medicines safely. Staff understood how to protect people from abuse and keep people safe. The character and suitability of staff was checked during recruitment procedures to make sure, as far as possible, they were safe to work with people who used the service.
There were enough staff to deliver the care and support people required. People told us staff were kind and knew how people liked to receive their care. Staff received an induction when they started working for the service and completed regular training to support them in meeting people’s needs effectively. People told us staff had the right skills to provide the care and support they required.
The manager understood the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA), and staff respected people’s decisions and gained people’s consent before they provided personal care.
Care records were up to date and provided staff with accurate information on how they should support people, according to their preferences. Care reviews were undertaken every three months, or when people’s needs changed, so that staff could continue to meet people’s care and support requirements.
Staff felt supported to do their work effectively by the management team. Staff had regular meetings with their manager and there was an out of hours’ on call system in operation, which ensured management support and advice was always available for staff.
People told us the manager and office staff were approachable. Communication was encouraged and identified concerns were acted upon by the manager and provider. People knew how to complain and information about making a complaint was readily available for people. Staff said they could raise any concerns or issues with the manager, knowing they would be listened to and acted on. The provider monitored feedback to identify any trends and patterns, and made changes to the service in response.
Quality assurance systems were in place to assess and monitor the quality of the service. There was regular communication with people and staff whose views were gained on how the service was run. The provider and manager sought advice from experts in their field, people and staff on how to make continuous improvements.
People and relatives confirmed that they had given their consent and been involved in discussions about their care. We found that people were involved in their care plans and staff had a good knowledge of people's needs and knew how they liked their care to be provided. People said: 'Oh yes, I am satisfied with the service they are an absolute godsend'. 'I'm very happy with the staff, a very professional service'.
There were systems in place to make sure people received their medication safely and staff had been thoroughly checked to make sure they were suitable to work with vulnerable adults.
People told us they had been asked for their feedback on the service they received. They said they did not have any complaints and were confident that when issues were raised they would be listened to and acted upon.
People who used the service said they were satisfied with the service. They said the staff were friendly and caring. They arrived on time, completed their tasks fully and stayed for the allocated time of the call.
We spoke with four people who received a service from this agency and two relatives over the telephone. People spoke positively about the staff 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.
Some people said that their care was personalised to their needs and they knew about their care plans. People said that they felt that staff were trained and understood their needs.
People told us that they felt safe using the service and if they had concerns they would speak with a family member, friend or somebody from the office.
They told us that they had been asked by the agency if they were happy with the service and had the opportunity to voice their opinions about the care being provided.