We carried out a review of the data available to us about Care 24-7 Limited on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Care 24-7 Limited, you can give feedback on this service.
Care 24-7 limited is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats in the community. It provides a service to both older adults and, younger disabled adults. At the time of the inspection, 101 people were receiving personal care from the service.
A registered manager was in place. 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.
At our last inspection, we rated the service good. At this inspection, we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and on-going monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.
We found the service was not always safe. Staff were trained in safeguarding people from abuse and put this training into practice. Staff had time to spend with people. We saw safeguarding procedures were in place and these were followed to help keep people safe.
Medicines were managed safely and staff had good knowledge of the medicine systems and procedures in place to support this. The support people received with their medicines was person centred and responsive to their needs. However, there was a shortfall in documentation; the provider had a plan in place to address this.
The service worked in partnership with other agencies including health professionals to help ensure people’s needs were met. People’s healthcare needs were assessed and plans of care put in place.
Staff were skilled and competent to meet the needs of people. Training was tailored to meet the needs of the residents. People were supported by kind, caring and compassionate staff. This meant people received good care.
There was enough staff deployed to ensure people received consistently and timely care. Staff were able to arrive on time and stay with people for the allocated amount of time. Safe recruitment procedures were followed to help ensure staff were of suitable character to work with vulnerable people. Staff received a range of training which was relevant to their role.
The service was compliant with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). People’s consent was sought before care and support was offered.
A complaints procedure was in place, which enabled people to raise any concerns or complaints about the care, or support they received.
Incidents and accidents were recorded and investigated by the service. We saw a low number of incidents had occurred with no concerning trends or themes.
Care 24-7 Limited provides home care services in the Bradford and Leeds areas of West Yorkshire from spacious office premises in Shipley.
We inspected the main offices of Care 24-7 Limited on the 11 February 2015. The provider was given 48 hours’ notice because the location provides a domiciliary care service. Our last inspection of the service took place in February 2014 and at that time we found the agency was meeting all the regulations we looked at.
There was a registered manager in post. 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.
The organisation’s staff recruitment and selection procedures were robust which helped to ensure people were supported by staff suitable to work in the caring profession. In addition, all the staff we spoke with were aware of signs and symptoms which may indicate people were possibly being abused and the action they needed to take.
The registered manager told us that sufficient care staff were employed for operational purposes. However, they confirmed that in line with other services in the care sector they were experiencing some difficulty recruiting and retaining staff, therefore staff recruitment was on going.
The staff training matrix was up to date and we saw one to one supervision meetings took place to support staff to carry out their roles effectively.
We saw the agency had recently introduced a new care planning system and that care/support plans were person centred and were reviewed on a regular basis to make sure they provided accurate and up to date information and were fit for purpose.
The staff we spoke with were able to describe how individual people preferred their care and support to be delivered and the importance of treating people with respect in their own homes. People who used the service and their relatives told us staff were very caring and always provided care and support in line with their agreed support plan.
The provider had policies and procedures relating to the safe administration of medication in people's own homes which gave guidance to staff on their roles and responsibilities.
There was a complaints procedure available which enabled people to raise any concerns or complaints about the care or treatment they received. The majority of people we spoke with spoke told us they were aware of the complaints procedure and would have no hesitation in making a formal complaint if they had any concerns about the standard of care provided.
There was a quality assurance monitoring system in place that continually monitored and identified shortfalls in service provision. Audit results were analysed for themes and trends and there was evidence that learning from incidents/investigations took place and appropriate changes were made to procedures or work practices if required.
We found staff were well supported in their role and were provided with an appropriate level of support and training in order for them to carry out their role effectively.
We also found the provider had an accurate Statement of Purpose (SoP) and it contained the necessary information including aims and objectives, the kinds of services provided, names of key individuals working for the service, legal status of the provider and details of the office address.
The provider had an appropriate system in place for gathering, recording and evaluating information about the quality and safety of care the service provided. People who used the service were asked for their views about their care and treatment.
There was an effective complaints system in place. The nurse in charge told us if complaints were made they would be responded to appropriately.
One person commented, "they have been brilliant they are excellent I have no complaints whatsoever," another person said "I can not speak too highly of them," and another person said "very pleased with them, they are very good and committed. The staff that come are brilliant."
The care records we reviewed showed people who used the service were involved in making care decisions and consented to their care. The care records also showed care plans were up to date and people had their health and welfare needs met.
We spoke with two care staff who were very complimentary about the agency and the support they received. One care worker told us, "I enjoy my job."