Lotus Home Care, Rotherham

Updated 5 August 2023

The inspection

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

Inspection team

The inspection was carried out by 1 inspector and 1 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 by Experience’s made telephone calls to people and their relatives.

Service and service type

This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own homes.

Registered Manager

This service is required to have a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

At the time of our inspection there was a registered manager in post.

Notice of inspection

We gave the service 48 hours' notice of the inspection. This was because we needed to be sure the provider or registered manager would be in the office to support the inspection.

Inspection activity started on 9 May 2023 and ended on 19 May 2023. We visited the location's office on 9 May 2023.

What we did before the inspection

We reviewed the information we held about the service. We used the information the provider sent us in the provider information return (PIR). This is information providers are required to send us annually with key information about their service, what they do well, and improvements they plan to make. We also gathered feedback from the local authority. We used all this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection

We visited the office and spoke with the registered manager, directors, regional quality lead and 2 members of office staff. We reviewed records, including 4 people’s care plans and risk assessments, 3 staff recruitment and training records and a variety of records relating to the management of the service, including quality monitoring systems and audits.

We spoke with 7 people using the service and 4 relatives by telephone to seek their feedback about the service.

After the visit we spoke with 3 care staff by telephone and received written feedback from a further 3 care staff regarding their views of the service. We reviewed further evidence submitted to us electronically, including care plan, risk assessments and day to day records of care. We reviewed further information about the management of the service, including information about call time management, quality monitoring systems, audits and policies and procedures.

Updated 5 August 2023

About the service

Lotus Home Care Rotherham is a domiciliary care service providing personal care support to people living within their own homes. The service was providing care and support to 93 people at the time of the inspection. These included older people and younger adults, people living with dementia, people with a physical disability, and people with a learning disability and autistic people.

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

We expect health and social care providers to guarantee people with a learning disability and autistic people respect, equality, dignity, choices and independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ is the guidance CQC follows to make assessments and judgements about services supporting people with a learning disability and autistic people and providers must have regard to it.

Right Support

There had been times when the care delivered did not meet people's expectations. This had been related to staffing shortages. People told us their care calls were too late or too early and the continuity of care staff had deteriorated. Some people did not feel comfortable when their preference for being attended by care staff of a particular gender was not met. The provider was working to manage people’s care and reduce any risk. The provider had successfully recruited new staff, call times were stabilising and there was better staff consistency.

We have made a recommendation about the provider’s business continuity planning in relation to staffing.

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.

Right Care

People’s care plans were up to date and detailed the care and support people wanted and needed, so care was person-centred. Risks to people's health and safety were identified and assessed to ensure safe care delivery for people. Overall, people’s medicines were managed safely.

Right Culture

There was a culture of continuous improvement and the provider had strengthened their systems for monitoring the quality and safety of the service. The provider asked people and staff for their feedback about the service and this was used to learn lessons and make improvements. The provider had further developed and improved their systems and processes to make sure people were consulted and kept informed.

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 4 August 2018).

Why we inspected

We received concerns in relation to the quality and safety of care provided, missed and late visits, the management and oversight of the service and medicine management. As a result, we undertook a focused inspection to review the key questions of safe and well-led only.

For those key questions not inspected, we used the ratings awarded at the last inspection to calculate the overall rating. The overall rating for the service has changed from good to requires improvement based on the findings of this inspection.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.