Archived: Orchids Care

Orchids Care is a domiciliary care agency. On the day of our inspection 79 people were receiving care and support from Orchids Care.

Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also consider any wider social care provided.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

During this inspection, we identified a breach of regulation. Regulation 17 (good governance) governance and performance management systems were not always effective.

People told us they felt safe although said care staff were sometimes late. Identified risks to people’s health did not always contain detailed information to direct staff. Staff did not always receive annual medicine competency checks to check practices were safe prior to administering medicines.

Recruitment processes were of good quality. New staff received an induction. Staff received training which was up to date. The service received the input of other healthcare professionals where needed.

Staff were caring. People we spoke with were mainly complimentary about staff and the service. People and their relatives told us they very happy with the service. People were treated with dignity and respect. Care plan review dates were not always recorded within a person’s care plan record to show these had been updated.

The provider had a complaints procedure in place. People and their relatives were aware of how to make a complaint. People and staff were consulted and asked for feedback about the quality of the service.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported

them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was good (published 24 March 2017).

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.

Enforcement

We have identified a breach in relation good governance. Please see the action we have told the provider to take at the end of this report.

Orchids Care provides personal care and support to people in their own homes. At the time of this inspection, they were providing a service to 90 people with a variety of care needs, including people living with physical frailty or memory loss. The service is managed from an office based in Doncaster.

There was a registered manager in place. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission 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.

People who used the service, their relatives, staff and professionals told us the provider had a clear, supportive management structure in place. The registered manager and senior staff were actively involved in the day-to-day running of the service and knew people well, stepping in to help deliver care if needed and monitoring and reviewing people's care as their needs changed.

People were protected from risks to their health and wellbeing and were protected from the risk of abuse. Safe recruitment practices were followed before new staff were employed to work with people. Checks were made to ensure staff were of good character and suitable for their role.

Staff were suitably trained and supported in their work and knew how to meet people's needs. Staff received training and supervision to enable them to do their jobs safely and to a good standard.

People were treated with respect and their privacy and dignity was promoted. People said their care workers were kind and caring. Staff were responsive to the needs of the people they supported and enabled them to maintain their independence as much as possible.

People's health and well-being was assessed with measures put in place to ensure people's needs were met in an individualised way. Medicines were managed well and staff handling medicines were only allowed to do so after completing their training and being assessed as competent. Where included in their care package, people were supported to eat and drink enough.

People received support that was individualised to their specific needs. Their needs were monitored and care plans reviewed regularly or as changes occurred. People's rights to make their own decisions, where possible, were protected and promoted by staff.

People benefitted from receiving a service that was managed well. Quality assurance systems were in place to monitor the quality of the care, the support being delivered and the running of the service.

Care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure people's safety and welfare. People we spoke with were complimentary about the service they received. One person told us: 'I can't speak highly enough of them, they are like your own family.' One relative said: 'The care plan is very comprehensive and up to date; it has changed over time with changing needs.'

People were protected against the risks associated with medicines because the provider had appropriate arrangements in place to manage medicines. One person told us: "They (staff), always remind me to take my medicines, they also watch me take it."

There were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff to meet people's needs.

People were protected from the risks of unsafe or inappropriate care and treatment because accurate and appropriate records were maintained.

People experienced care, treatment and support that met their needs and protected their rights. We were told "I am quite satisfied with the service I receive", "the carers I have now are very good and they know what I need and how I like things to be done". One relative told us "my mum's carer is great".

People were protected from the risk of infection because appropriate guidance had been followed. Staff records showed appropriate infection control training had been received by staff.

People were cared for, or supported by, suitably qualified, skilled and experienced staff. Appropriate checks had been undertaken before staff began work. This included carrying out a Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) check, taking up references from previous employers and checking evidence of the identification of new staff.

There was an effective complaints system available. Comments and complaints people made were responded to appropriately.