12 February 2020
During a routine inspection
Hodman Care Limited is a domiciliary care service providing personal care to people living in their own homes. At the time of inspection one person was receiving personal care.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
The person’s medicines were not always managed safely. Creams were not recorded on the person’s medicines records. We have made a recommendation about medicines management. Staff competencies to administer Medicines had been audited.
Systems and processes to safeguard people from the risk of abuse were in place, but the registered manager and staff were not familiar with the local authorities safeguarding process. We have made a recommendation about safeguarding.
The person was 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. However, the policies and systems in the service did not fully support this practice .
The provider’s recruitment rationale was not always evidenced when employing staff . We have made a recommendation about recruitment procedures.
Risks to the person had been assessed and reviewed. Care plans provided staff with guidance to meet their needs safely. The person was supported to maintain good health and had accessed health care services when needed. Staff prepared food and drink to meet the person’s dietary needs and requirements when required.
Staff training had been kept up to date and staff received formal supervision, but no annual appraisal. Staff practices were audited by the registered manager to ensure they provided care that people needed. Staff induction processes were sufficiently robust.
We were assured the person's needs and wishes were comprehensively and holistically assessed. There were systems and processes in place to assess and monitor the quality of care provided.
The registered manager was aware of their legal responsibilities and notified the Care Quality Commission as required. Improved communication and systems were in place to ensure the views of people, relatives and staff were sought, and any learning was shared with the staff team when things went wrong.
The person was supported by regular reliable staff who knew them and their needs well, which promoted continuity of care. A relative was confident complaints would be listened to and acted on. It was evident that people’s views about the service were sought individually and through surveys.
Rating at last inspection.
The last rating for this service was good (published 2 September 2017).
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating. We have found evidence that the provider needs to make improvements. Please see the Safe, Effective, and Well-led sections of this full report.
You can see what action we have asked the provider to take at the end of this full report.
Enforcement
We have identified a breach in relation safeguarding. Please see the action we have told the provider to take at the end of this report.
Follow up
We will meet with the provider following this report being published to discuss how they will make changes to ensure they improve their rating to at least good. We will work with the local authority to monitor progress. We will return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk .