Gaudium Also known as Assured Care

Updated 25 May 2022

The inspection

We carried out this performance review and assessment under Section 46 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act). We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements of the regulations associated with the Act and looked at the quality of the service to provide a rating.

Unlike our standard approach to assessing performance, we did not physically visit the office of the location. This is a new approach we have introduced to reviewing and assessing performance of some care at home providers. Instead of visiting the office location we use technology such as electronic file sharing and video or phone calls to engage with people using the service and staff.

Inspection team

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.

Service and service type

This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats and specialist housing.

Registered Manager

This service is required to have a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

At the time of our inspection there was a registered manager in post.

Notice of inspection

This inspection was announced. We gave a short period notice of the inspection because we were completing a remote inspection and we also needed consent from people and relatives to allow us to contact them.

Inspection activity started on 12 April 2022 and ended on 3 May 2022.

What we did before inspection

We reviewed information we had received about the service. We sought feedback from the local authority commissioning and safeguarding teams.

We used the information the provider sent us in the provider information return (PIR). This is information providers are required to send us annually with key information about their service, what they do well, and improvements they plan to make.

During the inspection

We spoke with four people and 10 relatives by telephone. We spoke with the registered manager who is also the nominated individual. The nominated individual is responsible for supervising the management of the service on behalf of the provider. We also spoke with the care manager and contacted every member of care staff to gather their feedback. The majority of care staff gave feedback.

We reviewed a range of records. This included care records for three people. We also reviewed medicine records for every person who received support. We looked at two staff files in relation to recruitment, support and some elements of training and induction.

This performance review and assessment was carried out without a visit to the location’s office. We used technology such as video calls to enable us to engage with people using the service and staff, and electronic file sharing to enable us to review documentation.

Updated 25 May 2022

About the service

Gaudium is a domiciliary care service providing personal care to adults living in their own homes. The service provides support to people with disabilities and older people. At the time of the inspection, the provider supported 17 people.

Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also consider any wider social care provided.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

Staff provided tailored care and support. People and their relatives were very happy with the service provided to them.

People received medicines as prescribed. We have made a recommendation to enhance procedures.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. We have made a recommendation to enhance future practice.

People felt very safe with care staff. Staff had received suitable training, including how to safeguard people from abuse. Staff knew how to report accidents and incidents and the provider had a system in place to learn lessons when things went wrong.

People were protected from the risk of infection as people told us staff followed PPE guidance.

Staff felt supported and confirmed they received checks on their competencies to ensure appropriate support to meet people’s care needs was delivered.

Where staff provided support with food and drinks, people and relatives said staff managed this well. Healthcare professionals told us the service worked well with them for the benefit of those they cared for.

People told us staff knew them well and were very kind and caring. People and their families were involved in their care planning and were helped to lead an independent a life as possible.

People knew how to complain. People and their relatives felt the service was well run and complimented the leadership team.

The provider had systems in place to monitor the quality of the service, including audits of procedures and feedback systems to help identify areas for potential improvement. There had been a recent cyber-attack of the providers IT systems and the provider had taken appropriate action.

This was an ‘inspection using remote technology’. This means we did not visit the office location and instead used technology such as electronic file sharing to gather information, and video and phone calls to engage with people using the service as part of this performance review and assessment.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was good (published 21 December 2018). At this inspection the rating has remained good.

Why we inspected

We undertook this inspection as part of a random selection of services rated Good and Outstanding.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.