Chesterfield Home Care Ltd Also known as Home Instead

Updated 12 June 2019

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team:

The inspection was carried out by one adult social care inspector.

Service and service type:

Home Instead Senior Care Chesterfield (Chesterfield Home Care Ltd) is a domiciliary care agency. The service provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats in the community.

The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. 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.

Notice of inspection:

We gave the service 24 hours’ notice of the inspection site visit because we needed to be sure that the registered manager would be available.

We visited the office location on 21 March 2019 to see the registered manager and office staff and to review care records and other documents relating to the running of the service.

What we did:

Before the inspection we sent out questionnaires to a sample of people to ask for their views about the service. This included people who used the service, their relatives and staff working in the service. We also contacted social care and health care professionals via e-mail to seek their views of the service, including social workers and specialist nurses.

We reviewed the information we held about the service and the service provider. We looked at the notifications we had received for the service. Notifications are information about important events the service is required to send us by law.

During the office site visit we looked at two people's care records. We checked staff recruitment, training and supervision records for two staff. We also looked at a range of records about how the service was managed, including audits, complaints records and minutes of meetings. We spoke with the registered manager, who is a company director, and briefly, with another company director. We met the operations manager, two schedulers and two care supervisors.

After the inspection we telephoned four people who used the service and four people’s relatives to gather their views about the care and support received. We also received feedback from four care staff via telephone.

Updated 12 June 2019

About the service:

Chesterfield Home Care Ltd, also known as Home Instead Chesterfield, is a domiciliary care agency. The service is registered to provide personal care. Not all people using the service received personal care. The service was providing personal care to 38 people at the time of the inspection.

People’s experience of using this service:

People who used the service received exceptional care from a very well led service. People consistently told us how they were supported with great kindness and respect. We received extremely positive feedback from people, relatives and professionals on how staff had developed caring relationships with people and their relatives.

The culture of the service was one of building positive relationships with people, assisting them wherever possible and going the extra mile to make sure people were happy and safe. People spoke about looking forward to the visits from staff. One person said, “Home Instead Chesterfield provide an absolutely first-class service in every respect.”

People were placed at the centre of the service and were consulted on every level. Respect for privacy and dignity was at the heart of culture and values of the service. Everyone told us staff asked them before carrying out tasks and involved people in deciding on how they wanted to be supported.

Relatives told us the staff noticed things that only close family members would and were willing to take on supporting people with any task, big or small, to ensure they were comfortable and happy. The willingness of staff to step in and help and their attention to detail was highlighted as particularly valuable by people’s relatives.

We saw instances of the service providing an extremely high standard of care and support to people at the end of their lives. This included helping people to fulfil their end of life wishes and creating special memories with and for their loved ones.

The service was especially well run. Staff and the registered manager shared the visions and values of the service and these were embedded within service delivery. There were systems to assess the quality of the service provided. The registered manager and director worked hands on with the staff team, training staff to a high standard, knowing people's needs and ensuring these were being met.

Staff worked in partnership with external health and social care professionals to ensure they supported people well. The lessons were learnt where appropriate to improve the service further.

People were supported by consistent and very well-trained staff. There was a very strong emphasis on continuous improvement with staff attending training on a range of subjects to ensure they supported people appropriately. This included the provider supporting staff to study for additional qualifications in areas such as dementia and end of life care. Staff spoke highly of the training and support they received.

People and their relatives told us they received safe care. Staff understood their responsibilities in protecting people from the risk of harm. Risks to people's well-being and their environment were detailed and updated when circumstances changed. People received support to take their medicines safely and as prescribed. Regular checks on staff and their ability to do their jobs in a safe way meant people could be reassured they were receiving good quality care.

More information is in the full version of the report.

Rating at last inspection:

At the last inspection the service was rated good (report published 14 December 2016). For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Why we inspected:

This was a planned inspection based on the rating at the last inspection.