Dominic Care Ltd

Updated 8 December 2017

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

This was a comprehensive inspection which took place on 1 and 2 November 2017, it was announced. The provider was given 48 hours’ notice because the location provides a domiciliary care service, we therefore needed to be sure that someone would be available in the office to assist with the inspection.

The inspection was carried out by one inspector and an Expert by Experience. An expert-by-experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service. The expert who assisted with this inspection was experienced in caring for older people and had personal knowledge of using services. On the first day of the inspection we visited the service’s office and conducted telephone interviews with people who use the service. On the second day we returned to the office and also visited four people with their agreement in their own homes.

Before the inspection we reviewed the information we held about the service which included notifications they had sent us. A notification is information about important events which the service is required to tell us about by law. We looked at previous inspection reports and contacted six community professionals for feedback. We did not receive any feedback from professionals.

We reviewed the Provider Information Return (PIR).This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

During the inspection we spoke with 14 people who use the service and nine relatives. We spoke with seven members of staff including the registered manager, operations manager, trainee manager, senior care administrator and three care staff. We received written feedback from a further eight staff following the inspection. We looked at records relating to the management of the service including eight people’s care plans and associated records. We reviewed five staff files including the recruitment records. We looked at staff training records, the compliments/complaints log and accident/incident records.

Updated 8 December 2017

This was a comprehensive inspection which took place on 1and 2 November 2017 and was announced. We gave the registered manager 48 hours' notice because the location provides a domiciliary care service and we needed to make sure someone would be in the office to assist us.

Dominic Care Ltd. is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats. It provides a service to older adults, younger disabled adults, people living with dementia and people with a learning disability. At the time of the inspection the service was providing personal care to 70 people.

The service had a registered manager as required. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the 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 present and assisted us during the inspection.

At the last inspection the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

People received safe care from the service. Risk assessments were completed and enabled people to receive care with a minimum of risk to themselves or the care staff. Robust recruitment procedures were followed to ensure as far as possible only suitable staff were employed. Staff were trained to safeguard and protect people. They reported concerns promptly when necessary. People received their medicines safely when they required them.

People continued to receive effective care from staff who were trained and had the necessary skills to fulfil their role. Staff felt supported by the one to one meetings, appraisals and staff meetings which provided time to seek advice, discuss and review their work. They had opportunities to develop their skills and knowledge as well as gain relevant qualifications.

When required, people were supported with nutrition and hydration. People’s healthcare needs were monitored and advice was sought from healthcare professionals when necessary. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible, the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

The service remained caring and people reported staff were kind and patient. People’s privacy and dignity were protected, they told us staff treated them with respect. People and when appropriate relatives were involved in making decisions about their care.

The service remained responsive to people’s individual needs. Staff knew people well and individual care plans were person-centred. They focused on the diverse needs and preferences of each person and their desired outcomes. Complaints were responded to appropriately and people felt they were listened to when concerns were raised. The service was working to the accessible information standard.

At the previous inspection the service was rated as Requires Improvement in well-led. Improvements had been made resulting in it being rated Good at this inspection. Records were complete, accurate and reviewed regularly. They were updated promptly to reflect current information. The registered manager and the management team were experienced and skilled. They promoted an open, person centred culture with a strong emphasis on providing excellent care and led by example. They listened to feedback and worked toward making improvements in the service. People’s views were sought and governance systems helped monitor the quality of the service.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.