Archived: Guinness Care Southlands

Updated 9 December 2017

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 announced and was undertaken by one adult social care inspector. The previous inspection of Guinness Care at Home Bristol was in April 2015. There were no breaches of the legal requirements at that time. The service was rated overall as Good but achieved an outstanding rating in the caring area.

Prior to the inspection we looked at the information we had about the service. This included notifications that had been submitted by the service. Notifications are information about specific important events the service is legally required to report to us.

We received feedback from five health or social care professionals prior to our inspection. We had asked them to tell us about their views of the service. Their comments have been included in the body of the report.

During our inspection we spoke with nine people who were supported by the service and two relatives. We spoke with 10 members of staff including the registered manager, the care coordinator, senior care staff and care staff, the regional manager, the director of care and the head of quality assurance and compliance. We looked at care records for five people, three staff employment records, training records, policies and procedures, audits, quality assurance reports and minutes of meetings.

Updated 9 December 2017

Guinness Care at Home Care Bristol is a domiciliary care agency registered to provide the regulated activity of personal care. They provided care and support to people in their own homes. There were three main areas where the service was provided. The care office was based in Southlands an extra care housing scheme (referred to throughout the report as ECHS). Services were provided to people living in Southlands, another sheltered housing complex called Anchor and also to people living in the very near vicinity.

The inspection was announced. We gave the registered manager 48 hours notice of the inspection. We did this to ensure key staff were available for the inspection. At the time of the inspection the service was providing a service to 58 people and the staff team was 24.

There was a registered manager in post at the service. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service and has the legal responsibility for meeting the requirements of the law; as does the provider. 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 service people received was safe. Staff understood their role in safeguarding people from harm and knew how to raise any safeguarding concerns they had witnessed or been told about. There were safe recruitment in place to ensure unsuitable workers were not employed. Any risks to people’s health and welfare were assessed and management plans put in place to reduce or eliminate that risk. There were enough care staff employed to meet people’s care and support needs.

The service was effective because staff had been trained to meet people’s needs. Staff had supervision sessions with the registered manager or senior staff where there work performance and training needs were assessed. The staff were aware of the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and understood their roles and responsibilities in supporting people to make their own choices and decisions.

When we inspected the service in April 2015 we had found that people received a very caring service. At this inspection we found that people still received a very caring service and continued to be outstanding. Care staff took time to listen and talk to people, they were described as going “above and beyond” what would be expected and there are examples in the main body of the report. People were treated with dignity and respect. People were involved in planning the care and support they received.

The service was responsive to people’s individual care and support needs and the service they received was personalised. Staff providing care and support were familiar to people and knew them well. Feedback was gathered from people regarding their views and experience of the service they received. Any complaints or concerns raised about the service were handling correctly in line with the registered providers complaints policy. The service strived to make changes in response to people’s views and opinions.

People received a service that was well-led because the registered manager and other senior staff provided good leadership and management. The vision and values of the service were communicated and understood by staff. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities. The quality of service people received was continually monitored and any areas needing improvement identified and addressed.