Archived: Lotus Home Care Goole

Updated 26 May 2021

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. This inspection was planned to check 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 Care Act 2014.

Inspection team

The inspection was conducted 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.

Service and service type

This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own home. The service did not have a manager registered with CQC. A registered manager 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.

Notice of inspection

We gave the service 24 hours’ notice of the inspection. This was because we needed to ensure staff would be available at the office to assist.

Inspection activity started on 8 April 2021 and ended on 26 April 2021. We visited the office location on 12 and 19 April 2021.

What we did before the inspection

We reviewed information we had received about the service since their registration. This included information from the provider and from other sources. We requested feedback from the local authority who contract with this service. We used all this information to plan our inspection. The provider was not asked to complete a provider information return prior to this inspection. This is information we require providers to send us to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We took this into account when we inspected the service and made the judgements in this report.

During the inspection

The provider submitted a range of documentation prior to the first office visit. We then visited the office twice and spoke to care staff over the telephone in between the site visits. We also reviewed information submitted to CQC from care staff. The Expert by Experience spoke with people and relatives over the telephone to gather their feedback on the service. We spoke with nine people who used the service and two relatives over the telephone. We spoke with eight staff, including the regional manager, manager, a care co-ordinator and five care workers. We also received email feedback from two care workers.

We looked at records related to people’s care and the management of the service. We viewed seven people’s care records, three staff recruitment and induction files, training and supervision information, and records used to monitor the quality and safety of the service.

After the inspection

We continued to review evidence from the inspection and sought clarification from the provider to validate evidence found.

Updated 26 May 2021

About the service:

Lotus Home Care Goole is a domiciliary care agency providing care and support to people with a range of support needs living in their own homes. There were 58 people being supported with personal care at the time of our inspection. We reviewed regulated activity provided from the Lotus Home Care Goole office. The provider advised they also have a satellite office in Beverley. CQC believe this is operating as a separate care agency and we are looking at this outside of the inspection process.

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:

People received care from staff who were trained and caring in their approach, but some improvement was required to make call times more consistent for people. The provider was aware and working to address this. Safeguarding systems needed to be more robust to ensure all issues were consistently investigated and dealt with in line with policies. The provider’s policy in relation to COVID-19 needed updating to reflect current guidance, and the provider agreed to address this.

Staff received induction, spot checks and supervision, but we received mixed feedback which showed work was required to improve the culture within the service, so that all staff felt supported and risks to staff were appropriately assessed. There was no registered manager at the service, which is a condition of the provider’s registration. A new manager had recently started and they planned to apply to register with CQC. They demonstrated commitment to making required improvements.

There was a quality assurance system in place, including audits, spot checks and quality assurances surveys. These processes had not identified and addressed some of the issues we found during the inspection. Improvement was required to make sure these systems were more effective, and to ensure all feedback and issues were addressed consistently and promptly. We have made a recommendation about the management of complaints.

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. Staff sought people’s consent to the care they provided.

People were supported with their health and nutritional needs and staff worked alongside other health professionals to meet people’s needs where required. People confirmed they received appropriate support with their medicines and responsive action had been taken by the provider when errors had been identified.

There were detailed care plans in place which helped staff provide care in line with people’s needs and preferences. Staff understood people’s care needs, likes and dislikes.

People’s privacy and dignity was respected and people told us staff promoted their independence and safety. People confirmed they would feel comfortable raising any concerns.

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

Rating at last inspection:

This service was registered with CQC on 8 July 2019 and this was the first rated inspection of the service.

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the provider’s registration. The inspection was also prompted in part due to concerns received about management, medicines and staffing. A decision was made for us to inspect and examine those risks.

We found evidence that the provider needs to make improvements in some areas. Please see the safe and well-led sections of this full report.

The provider started action straightaway to address the concerns identified.

Enforcement

We have identified a breach at this inspection in relation to governance. You can see what action we have asked the provider to take at the end of this full report.

Follow up

We will request an action plan from the provider to understand what they will do to improve the standards of quality and safety. We will work alongside the provider and local authority to monitor progress. We will return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.