We carried out a review of the data available to us about Home Fairy - Derby 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 Fairy - Derby, you can give feedback on this service.
Home Fairy CIC is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats in the community in Derby and Derbyshire and provides a service to adults. The majority of people, who use the service, receive services which are not regulated by the Care Quality Commission (CQC). For example, housework, gardening and support to access the wider community. CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. At the time of our inspection there were seven people receiving personal care. The service operates between the hours of 8am and 6pm, all personal care and support is delivered between these times. The service has a minimum time set for staff to provide a service, which has been set at one hour.
Following the last inspection on 7 March 2017 we asked the provider to take action to make improvements in its staff recruitment practices. The provider submitted an action plan outlining their planned improvements and this action has been completed.
Home Fairy CIC had a registered manager. 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.
The overall rating for the service awarded at the previous inspection which took place on 7 March 2017 was requires improvement at which time we identified a breach of the regulations. This inspection has found improvements have been made and the overall rating for the service has been revised to good.
The provider’s recruitment procedures ensured pre-employment checks were carried out on prospective employees to ascertain their suitability to work with people. We found there were sufficient staff employed to meet people’s needs, who had the appropriate training and support to delivery good quality care, which included tailored training to meet people’s health care needs.
Staff had undertaken training in safeguarding to enable them to recognise signs and symptoms of abuse and knew how to report them. Potential risks to the environment in which people lived had not been assessed, which meant there was potential for people using the service or staff. The registered manager took action by developing a form to record potential environmental risks and record the action to reduce the identified risk. Potential risks to people were assessed and plans were put into place to minimise risk, which staff understood and followed.
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’s rights were upheld and decisions about their care were sought as part of the assessment process to identify their needs. The management team had focused on improving the involvement of people using the service or family members in the assessment process and development and review of care plans.
People’s health and welfare was promoted as staff supported people with the preparation and cooking meals. Staff liaised and worked with health care professionals to promote people’s health, which included providing support to people receiving end of life care and the management of individual health needs.
People received care from staff that in many instances had developed positive relationships. People’s communication needs were considered as part of the initial assessment process. People who were deaf were supported by staff who communicated with them in their preferred communication style, which included the use of British Sign Language.
The registered manager monitored the quality of the service provided by seeking the views of people who use the service and that of their family members. However people did not receive an overall analysis and any planned actions that would be taken in response to people’s collective comments. To further support quality monitoring staff had regular contact with the registered manager, who was available to provide support and guidance. Staff spoke positively about the service and the support they received from the registered manager.
Family members spoke positively about the service their relatives received, they told us they found the registered manager and staff to be approachable and they had confidence in the service provided. We received positive feedback from a commissioner as to the quality of the service.
Home Fairy - Derby is a domiciliary care agency providing a range of service including personal care to older people, younger adults and people living with a disability or dementia. The service also supports people who use British sign language (BSL) by providing staff with appropriate communication skills. Home Fairy – Derby also supported people with community activities and daily living tasks. There were six people in receipt of personal care at the time of our inspection.
There was a registered manager in post; they were also the service provider. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission. 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.
The provider's arrangements for staff recruitment were unsafe and did not ensure suitable people were employed. We found that all the required pre-employment checks were not in place.
We found that the provider’s quality assurance systems had not picked up the issues we identified at this inspection visit. This demonstrated that the management systems were not always effective in recognising areas which required improvements.
People told us they felt safe with the care provided by staff. Staff we spoke with understood their responsibility in protecting people from the risk of harm. Staff told us they had received training. However some staff felt that they did not have an detailed induction to help them to understand and support people effectively.
Risk assessments and care plans had been developed with the involvement of people. Staff told us they had the relevant information on how to minimise identified risks to ensure people were supported in a safe way. Medicines were generally safely managed
Staff told us they received the induction, training and supervision they needed to be able to deliver effective care. We noted that staff had not completed specific training in the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005. The MCA helps to ensure that people are supported to make their own decisions wherever possible. The provider understood their responsibility to comply with the requirements of the MCA.
People received appropriate support to manage their meals and nutrition when required. This was done in a way that met with their needs and choices. People’s health needs were met, staff confirmed if they were concerned about people’s health care needs they would notify the office or contact the relevant service as required.
People were supported by staff that were kind and caring The registered manager and staff we spoke with were caring and respectful in the way they spoke about people who used the service. Staff demonstrated a commitment to providing person-centred care and supporting people to be as independent as possible.
The provider’s complaints policy and procedure were accessible to people who used the service and their representatives. People’s relatives knew how to make a complaint.
People’s relatives and staff felt the service was well managed. Staff felt supported by the registered manager.
We found a breach of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.