• Services in your home
  • Homecare service

Archived: Gloucestershire Link Homecare

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Unit 31 Space Business Centre, Olympus Park, Quedgeley, Gloucestershire, GL2 4AL (01452) 890737

Provided and run by:
Cleeve Hill Healthcare Limited

All Inspections

13 August 2015

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We carried out an unannounced comprehensive inspection of this service on 23 March 2015 at which a breach of legal requirements was found. This was because the registered person did not have suitable arrangements for establishing and acting in accordance with the best interests of the person using the service.

After the comprehensive inspection, the provider wrote to us to say what they would do to meet legal requirements in relation to the breach. We undertook a focused inspection on 13 August 2015 to check that they had followed their plan and to confirm that they now met legal requirements.

This report only covers our findings in relation to this topic. You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for ‘Gloucestershire Link Homecare’ on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

Gloucestershire Link Homecare had a registered manager. 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.

At our focused inspection on 23 August 2015 we found the provider had followed the action plan which they had told us would be completed by 30 June 2015 and legal requirements had been met. People’s capacity to make decisions about their care and support was being assessed whether they were able to make certain decisions, at a certain time. When people are assessed as not having the capacity to make a decision, a best interest decision is made involving people who know the person well and other professionals, where relevant. There was evidence this process was being followed.

25/03/2015

During a routine inspection

This was an announced inspection which included a visit to the offices of Gloucestershire Link Homecare on the 25 March 2015. We also carried out visits to people in their own homes on 25 and 27 March 2015. This service moved into this office in August 2014 and this was the first inspection of the service at this location.

Gloucestershire Link Homecare provides personal care to people living in their own homes in areas around Gloucester, Stroud and the Forest of Dean. At the time of our inspection personal care was being provided to over 160 people.

There was a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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 registered manager was supported by senior supervisors.

We found a breach of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. (At the time of our visit the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2010 were in force. These were superseded on 1 April 2014). The provider had made decisions in people’s best interests but had not evidenced their assessment of the person’s capacity to make particular decisions about their care. The provider had not ensured that care and support was provided with the consent of the relevant person. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.

The registered manager had identified areas for improvement within the service as a result of complaints, safeguarding alerts and accidents. These areas for development included making sure staff were equipped with the skills and knowledge to perform their roles and were competent carrying out their roles. People’s care records were being reviewed and replaced with new records. Medicines errors had resulted in staff receiving additional training and replacing some medicines administration records.

People told us they received care which reflected their individual preferences and routines. They said, “All the staff are very nice and very helpful. I look forward to them coming here” and “I’m quite happy with the way I’m treated and I would recommend the service”. Staff told us they were supported to carry out their roles through a training programme, individual and team meetings and an accessible manager. Staff said they “loved” their work and provided “good” care.

People said they felt safe. Staff knew how to keep people safe and to report concerns to senior staff. Health professionals said the service worked with them to keep people safe and well after discharge from hospital.

People gave us mixed feedback about how their concerns or complaints were dealt with. Whilst some people were happy with the response and action taken, others felt they were not responded to quickly enough or the appropriate action taken. The registered manager was working to resolve people’s experience of making complaints by meeting with them face to face to discuss their concerns no matter how small.

People had different experiences about how their visits were arranged and staff allocated to them. They all wished to have a consistent staff team who understood their needs and how they liked their care to be provided. People who always saw the same staff team and whose visits were stable were positive and spoke highly of staff. People who had different staff and had visit times which changed praised staff but recognised their experience of care could be improved. The registered manager was aware of this and said, “We aim to be the best we can.”