About the service: Goodhands Commcare Ltd is a domiciliary care agency that was providing personal care to five people at the time of the inspection.

People’s experience of using this service:

People told us they were happy with the care provided by Goodhands Commcare ltd. One person told us “I’m very satisfied with everything” while a relative told us, “I’ve had worse. They are excellent – they do know what they are doing.” However, we had numerous concerns about how the service was managed, in particular we found evidence that indicated the service was not well-led.

No staff had completed any infection control training though staff we spoke to did have an understanding of infection control. We discovered one person whose health needs would require staff to have good knowledge of infection control and we asked that care to this person cease until staff had been trained. Lessons were not always learned when things went wrong as we found incidents were not recorded properly. Risks to people were not always recorded or identified. Recruitment practices were poor. Medicines were not always recorded and managed properly. There were safeguarding processes in place and staff appeared to have an understanding of what to do if they suspected abuse, but no staff had received any training on safeguarding.

There was no recognised mandatory training within the service and the attendance of training courses was poor. Staff had not received any supervision that had been documented. They were no inductions recorded in staff files. We checked whether the service was working within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA), legislation that protects people with mental capacity and memory issues, and found them to be non-compliant as staff did not understand the principles and no staff had received training on the MCA.

There were sufficient staff working at the service. People’s needs were assessed before they received a service. People were supported to eat and drink. Staff communicated effectively with each other about people’s needs. People were supported to lead healthier lives.

People told us that staff were caring. People were supported to express their views and were involved in decision making about their care, however we have made a recommendation about care planning. People’s privacy was respected and their independence promoted.

People’s needs were recorded in care plans and they received care from staff who knew them. However, we have made a recommendation about capturing people’s preferences. People knew how make complaints but told us they had no need to.

The registered manager was unaware of the needs of the service. Staff were aware of their roles. Quality assurance measures at the service were poor as they did not complete a broad range of audits and checks on safety and quality. There were no meetings held but the service told us they would hold staff meetings. The service had yet to form partnerships with others.

Rating at last inspection: This is the services first inspection.

Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on our scheduling of regulated services.

Follow up: We identified breaches of two regulations relating to safe care and treatment and staffing. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report. We have also made two recommendations in this report that will be followed up at our next inspection. We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about this service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received, we may inspect sooner.