The Beacon provides personal care to adults in their own homes. It also plans to provide shorter care packages, such as reablement services, to people who have been discharged from hospital or whose needs have changed. At the time of inspection there were eight people using the service. The majority of people who used the service were receiving end of life care.

This is the first time we have inspected the service.

There was a registered manager in place with suitable experience and knowledge of the service. 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 felt safe and there were risk assessments in place to ensure staff knew how to keep people safe. These were regularly reviewed and information effectively shared where risks changed. Some risk assessments would benefit from more personalised details.

Where staff administered medicines they had been appropriately trained. The majority of people who used the service self-medicated. The documentation and auditing of this aspect of medicines administration was not effective or in line with good practice and required improvement.

We have made a recommendation about the management of medicines.

All staff were aware of their safeguarding responsibilities and demonstrated a good understanding of the risks people faced.

No concerns were raised by relatives or external professionals, with all expressing confidence in the registered manager and the staff they had interacted with.

Rota planning was simple and effective. This information was shared routinely with staff and people who used the service. Out of hours on call arrangements were in place and there was no evidence of any missed calls. There was no clear contingency plan in place should there be a missed call; the registered manager addressed this during our inspection.

There had been no accidents, injuries or safeguarding issues since the service began providing care. The registered manager was able to tell us how they planned to document these instances and to analyse them for patterns or trends. They had not, at the time of inspection, implemented these processes.

There was consistent and effective liaison with a range of external professionals, such as nurses and social workers, to ensure people’s needs could be well met.

Staff were well supported by way of induction, shadowing and training. The registered manager could demonstrate plans for future training and supported staff to pursue career goals. Staff morale was high.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People who used the service and relatives praised how staff respected and supported their cultural and religious beliefs.

Continuity of care was strong, with all people feeling at home with care staff and never experiencing a carer they had not been introduced to. A number of care staff spoke Bengali and/or Punjabi, meaning people who used the service, for whom these were there first languages, were able to have in depth conversations with their care staff.

Staff treated people in a dignified manner and feedback was consistently strong regarding how compassionate and patient staff were.

The registered manager planned to send surveys to people who used the service and their relatives, to help gain more feedback about what they could do better.

Care files were brief but well-ordered and logical. The registered manager made some improvements to aspects of the plans we found to be lacking in person-centred detailed. Other aspects of the care plans contained and excellent level of person-centred detail.