Loving Homecare Ltd

Safe – this means we looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm.

This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.

We assessed 8 quality statements in the safe key question.

Although staff were aware of any risks to people, people’s care records did not always evidence they had been fully considered and did not always contain enough guidance for staff.

Although no incidents had taken place, processes were in place to ensure lessons were learned from safety incidents. Safeguarding and whistle-blowing policies were in place which helped protect people from the risk of abuse and harm.

The service carried out an environmental check of people’s home to help ensure the environment was safe for both people and staff to work in.

Staff were recruited safely and were provided with training and support to ensure they were able to carry out their roles.

Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence.

This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

We assessed 6 quality statements in the effective key question.

Staff sought people’s consent before they carried out care and treatment, although electronic care plans did not evidence people had signed their care plan, people had signed the paper version.

People were involved in the assessment of their needs and their care was planned with their involvement.

Staff worked effectively with outside agencies, such as occupational therapists, to help meet people’s individual needs and support them to live healthier lives.

Caring – this means we looked for evidence that the service involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

We assessed 5 quality statements in the caring key question.

People told us they were treated well by staff who they knew well. People told us staff were kind and respected their dignity and maintained their independence. People’s protected characteristics were respected and not viewed as a barrier to the care and treatment they required.

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the service met people’s needs.

This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

We assessed 7 quality statements in the responsive key question.

People’s care plans demonstrated people were at the centre of their care and support. However, some additional person-centred information was required to provide improved guidance for staff to follow.

It was evident people’s needs were understood by staff. We saw how the registered manager had identified where people required support and had made the appropriate referrals to external agencies, leading to people leading an improved quality of life.

Information was provided to people in a way in which they understood, (including different languages) and in line with the Accessible information standard.

Well-led – this means we looked for evidence that service leadership, management and governance assured high-quality, person-centred care; supported learning and innovation; and promoted an open, fair culture.

This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated good. This meant the service was consistently managed and well-led. Leaders and the culture they created promoted high-quality, person-centred care.

We assessed 8 quality statements in the well-led key question.

Although written audits needed some further development, the registered manager demonstrated a good understanding of their role and accountability. The registered manager valued their staff team and promoted a culture of staff feeling valued. Processes were in place to ensure any concerns were listened to and acted on appropriately.

The manager promoted a culture of learning and improvement, which was understood and practices by staff to help further improve standards in the safety and quality of the care being provided.

The service worked in collaboration with external health care providers to help improve the quality of people’s experiences.