Luv To Care Home Care Ltd

Updated 16 January 2024

Date of on-site assessment 05 February 2024. Luv to Care Home Care Ltd is a domiciliary care agency providing personal care to people in their own homes. The service provides support to younger and older people with a variety of needs, including people living with dementia. At the time of our assessment there were 52 people using the service. This assessment was prompted by information we held about this service. We assessed a total of 10 quality statements under the Safe, Effective, and Well-led key questions. At the last inspection this service was rated as requires improvement. During this assessment we evidenced that the provider had made and embedded a number of improvements across the service and overall the service was performing well under the quality statements we reviewed. There were enough staff to meet people’s needs, however feedback from some people indicated that newer staff were not always confident or lacked experience which they felt impacted their experience of the care provided. We found there were sufficient control measures to mitigate identified risks to people. The provider operated safe and effective safeguarding systems. Overall, the systems to manage people’s medicines were suitable and mostly reflected best practice guidance. Staff wore appropriate personal protective equipment and understood the importance of protecting people from the risk of infection. People were supported by staff who understood the importance of enabling people to make decisions. People’s needs were assessed before they received a service, and this information was used to generate person-centred support plans on how staff should support people to meet their needs. The provider operated effective quality assurance and governance systems to ensure they maintained oversight of the running of the service. Staff told us they felt the service was well-led and most staff felt supported in their role.

Updated 16 January 2024

We spoke with 12 people using the service and 2 relatives. Overall, we received positive feedback from people that they felt they received safe care and treatment from staff. People told us where staff were consistent, they had established good relationships. However, where people required support from 2 care staff, we received feedback from some people that they did not always feel newer recruited staff were confident or knew them or their needs well. People told us staff wore appropriate personal protective equipment such as gloves and aprons when supporting them with their needs. Where people required support with medicines this was provided, however some people told us staff were sometimes late to calls which they felt impacted their routines. People told us they had their needs assessed by staff before they received a service, and most people knew who to contact if they had any concerns. We received mixed feedback where people required meal support. Some people felt they received good support to manage their nutrition, but some people felt the experience could be improved. Most people told us that staff sought consent before supporting them with any care tasks and told us staff supported them to make decisions about their care.