Archived: Trinity House Care Services Limited1

Updated 29 April 2015

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection checked 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 inspection took place on 20th March 2015 and was announced. The provider was given 48 hours’ notice because the location provides a domiciliary care service and we needed to be sure that someone would be in.

The inspection was carried out by one adult social care inspector.

Before the inspection the provider completed a 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. We also reviewed the information we held about the service, such as notifications we had received from the registered provider. A notification is information about important events which the service is required to send us by law. We planned the inspection using this information.

We looked at the care file kept in the office for the person in receipt of care. We also looked at paperwork kept in this person’s home.

We met one person who used the service and a member of this person’s family.

We spoke with the registered manager and we telephoned the care assistant who delivered care in this agency.

We looked at the care file kept in the office for the person in receipt of care. We also looked at paperwork kept in this person’s home.

We looked at the file for the member of staff who delivered the care. We also looked at the staff file of one other person who might be called on to deliver care if the main care assistant was not available. These files contained evidence of how recruitment was managed and the ongoing supervision and appraisal of these staff.

We looked at the record of training received and the training plan.

We saw records related to the monitoring of quality, the management of the office and the business plan for the agency.

We also spoke with commissioners prior to our visit but they had no information about the agency.

Updated 29 April 2015

This was an announced inspection that took place on Friday 20th March 2015.

Trinity House provides care in people’s own homes in the Copeland area. On the day of the inspection care was being delivered to one person. The company also run a nursing agency from this location. Nursing agencies are not registered with the Care Quality Commission.

The service has a registered manager. 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

We judged that people who used this service were safe because therey were suitable arrangements in place to safeguard vulnerable people from harm, abuse or neglect. Staff understood how to keep people safe.

The office was secure and confidential files were kept locked away. Good recording systems were in place so that any accidents or incidents would be monitored appropriately.

We judged that staffing levels were suitable. Staff were recruited appropriately with checks on candidates’ background made prior to the staff member having access to people in the community. There were suitable disciplinary procedures in place.

We checked on medicines management for the service user. This was being done appropriately. The registered manager ensured that staff had suitable training and guidance on management of medicines.

We checked on the files of two members of staff and we saw that they received appropriate training, induction, supervision and appraisal. We judged that staff development was important to the registered manager.

The registered manager was aware of her responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

The agency's office needed some decorative improvements and we were told that this was being dealt with. The office had suitable secure, fireproof storage. Telephone and IT systems were in place.

We had evidence to show that the person who used the service found the staff who visited to be kind, caring and respectful. We learned that privacy, dignity and confidentiality were important in this agency.

We had evidence to show that good assessments of need were completed before the new service started. We read a detailed care plan and saw a copy of tasks to be completed in the person’s home. We noted that staff were supporting this person to be less socially isolated.

The agency had a registered manager who had suitable training and experience.

There was a suitable quality monitoring system in place and we had evidence to show that the registered manager made weekly checks on the quality of care delivery. Training, risk management, management of medicines and delivery of care were all monitored closely. There was a quality monitoring plan in place and a business development plan.