Francis Lodge Care Agency

Updated 17 August 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 was carried out by one inspector. We visited the office location on 3 July 2018. We gave the service two working days’ notice of the inspection visit because it is small and the provider was often out of the office supporting staff or providing care. We needed to be sure that they would be in.

Before the inspection we looked at information we held about the service. This information included the Provider Information Return (PIR) which the provider had completed before the inspection. The PIR is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We discussed the PIR with the provider during the inspection.

During our visit to the office premises we spoke with the provider and looked at written feedback from people’s relatives about the service. We also reviewed a variety of records which related to people's individual care and the running of the service. These records included care files for both people using the service, one staff record and a range of policies and other records that related to the management of the service.

Following the inspection, we spoke with one person using the service, one care staff, one person’s relative and a person’s advocate. We also received feedback about the service from one social care professional.

Updated 17 August 2018

We carried out an announced inspection of Francis Lodge Care Agency on 3 July 2018. We gave the provider two working days’ notice of the inspection because the service provides care to people in their own homes and we wanted to make sure that the provider was available on the day of the inspection.

This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own homes in the community. At the time of the inspection of Francis Lodge Care Agency it was providing two older people with personal care. Cleaning and other tasks were also carried out by the service.

The previous inspection of the service took place 26 July 2016. Following that inspection the service was not awarded a rating because at that time there was only one person using the service. As there was only one person using the service we did not have enough evidence to enable us to rate the quality of the service overall and for each of the five key questions, to assess whether the service was; safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led. There were no breaches of legal requirements at the last inspection.

This service does not require a registered manager as the regulated activity personal care is carried on by an individual who is registered with us in their own name. The individual Ms Monica Maxwell is in charge of day to day activity carried out by the service.

At the time of the inspection the provider carried out most of the personal care, with support from one care worker. Staff had the skills, knowledge and experience needed to care for people. Staff received the support they needed to carry out their role and responsibilities. A member of staff told us the training was useful and informative.

A person using the service and a person’s relative informed us that they were happy with the care and the other services they received. People received consistency of care from staff that they knew. People told us that staff were polite and respectful.

People had been visited by the provider before their support began who carried out an assessment of their needs. People received personalised care and the service was responsive to their needs. People were consulted about how they would like to receive their care and their preferences were supported. People’s care plans were up to date and included information staff needed about how best to support them.

People and where applicable their relatives and representatives were fully involved in making decisions about people’s care. The provider worked with healthcare and social care professionals, and people’s relatives and advocates to provide people with the care and support that they needed.

A person using the service told us that they felt safe when receiving care from the service and they liked the staff who treated them well. Procedures were in place to protect people and keep them safe. Staff knew how to identify abuse and understood their responsibilities in relation to safeguarding people and reporting concerns.

Risks to people’s and staff safety were identified and guidance was in place to manage and minimise risks of people being harmed and protect them.

The provider carried out appropriate checks so only staff who were suitable to work with people using the service were employed by the service.

People told us that staff were polite and respectful. Staff knew people well, listened to them, respected the choices they made and supported their independence.

People’s dietary needs were understood and supported by the service. People received the assistance and support that they needed and wanted to make sure their nutritional needs were met.

People and their relatives had the opportunity to feedback their views of the service and knew how to make a complaint.

There were systems in place to carry out checks, monitor the service and to make improvements when needed.

Arrangements were in place to make sure medicines were managed and administered safely so people received their medicines as prescribed.

We have made a recommendation about the management medicines for adults receiving social care in the community.