Gill Care Services

People told us they felt safe. Incidents and accidents were being documented and lessons learned. Risk assessments were in place however, some of these were only completed following our assessment. Staff were recruited safely and had the training they needed to undertake their role. PPE was available and infection prevention and control audits had been done. The registered manager, (who was also the nominated individual and the provider), took action to ensure medicines were being managed safely.

Care plans and assessments had been developed with the involvement of people and relatives. Staff told us they had access to these. Not all care plans and risk assessments in relation to individual medical needs were developed until the assessment. People were supported to access relevant professionals as required. Evidence of working with professionals was seen. People had agreed to their care and consents had been obtained, the provider took action to ensure where capacity assessments were required, these were in place.

People and relatives told us they were happy with their care, were treated with dignity, respect and their individual needs met. They said staff knew how to communicate with them. Staff understood how to meet people’s needs and were confident people received good care. Professionals were complementary about the service and raised no concerns. Care records were person centered about people’s individual needs. Staff confirmed how to support people’s individual needs. Staff told us they were happy working in the service and felt supported.

Staff knew people’s needs and confirmed updated were shared with them in a variety of ways. People, staff and the management confirmed professionals were involved. Professionals were complimentary about the service and we saw evidence of their involvement in records. Records included information about people’s needs however, not all of the information about their health needs was recorded. Policy and guidance was in place to deal with complaints or concerns. Records of complaints were seen along with actions as a result of these. Surveys had been completed and actions recorded of the findings. The provider told us no one was in receipt of end of life care. However, we received feedback which confirmed the involvement of specialist support services. The provider gave assurances of this arrangement and provided evidence that this was recorded.

Staff told us Gill Care Services was a good company to work for. Team meetings were being held regularly and staff told us they were engaged and involved. Staff had access to policies and procedures. The management team were committed to making improvements at the service and agreed that evidence should be retained which confirmed the actions they had taken. Monthly newsletters were developed and staff had access to a staff handbook. There was a business and contingency plan. However, the contingency plan for the company reflected a care home and not the domiciliary care service. Information was held securely and password were required to access electronic devices. A system was in place to deal with complaints, policy and guidance was available. We saw notifications submitted to the Care Quality Commission. The registered manager told us they would ensure these were available to view in the service as required. Professionals involved in people’s care were complementary about the service.