Grace Care UK

The service is a domiciliary care service, situated in Leicester. It provides personal care and treatment of disease, disorder and injury to older people, people with physical disabilities, younger adults and children from the ages of 13 to 18, living in their own homes. At the time of the inspection visit, three people were provided with personal care by the service.

People's experience of using this service

Risk assessments were in place to protect people from risks to their health and welfare.

Staff recruitment checks were carried out to protect people from receiving personal care from unsuitable staff.

A person and relatives said that safe personal care was provided.

Staff had been trained in safeguarding (protecting people from abuse). Staff members understood their responsibilities to safeguard people and to contact relevant agencies if needed.

The registered manager was aware that certain incidents, if they occurred, needed to be reported to us, as legally required.

Staff had largely received training to ensure they had skills and knowledge to meet people's needs. Further specialist training had not yet been provided on people's health conditions.

Staff members understood their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) to allow, as much as possible, people to have effective choices about how they lived their lives. Staff were aware to ask people's consent when they provided personal care. Capacity assessments were in place to determine how best to support people who did not have capacity to decide aspects of their lifestyles.

A person and relatives told us that staff were very friendly, caring and kind. They said they had been involved in making decisions about how and what personal care was needed to meet personal care needs.

Care plans contained personalised information about people's preferences and likes and dislikes, though there was little information about people's history, which would help staff to ensure that people's needs were fully met.

Staffing levels were sufficient to always provide people with the care they needed though care calls were not always timely.

People and relatives, except one relative, were confident that any concerns they had would be properly followed up. They were satisfied with how the service was run. Staff members said they had been supported in their work by the registered manager.

Audits to measure that a quality service had been provided to people were carried out though not all the important issues had been audited.

Staff worked in partnership with relatives so that people got the support they required from other agencies.

The voice of people, relatives and staff were not comprehensively involved in the running of the service to help drive improvements.