We carried out a review of the data available to us about Meadows Homecare Services 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 Meadows Homecare Services, you can give feedback on this service.
The registered manager for this service was not in post and not managing the regulatory activities at this location at the time of the inspection. However, they were still a registered manager on our register at the time. Arrangements had been made to cancel their registration with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) and an area operations manager was overseeing the day-to-day running 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.
This inspection was carried out on 18 and 19 October 2017 and was an announced inspection. At the last inspection on 21, 22, and 23 October 2015, the service was rated as ‘good.’ At this inspection we found the service remained ‘good.’
The CQC is required by law to monitor the operation of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and report on what we find. Staff were able to demonstrate an adequate understanding of the MCA to ensure that people did not have their freedom restricted in an unlawful manner. 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 had individualised health, care and support plans in place which recorded their needs. These plans prompted staff on any assistance a person may require and how they would like the support to be given. Individual risks to people were identified and assessed by staff. Plans were put into place to minimise these risks as far as practicable to enable people to live an independent and safe a life as possible. Arrangements were in place to make sure that people, who required this support, were assisted by staff with the safe management of their prescribed medication.
People were assisted to access a range of external health care professionals and were supported to maintain their health. People’s health and nutritional needs were met.
People who used the service were cared for by staff in a kind and respectful way. Staff supported people to maintain their interests and links with the local community.
People and their relatives were able to raise any suggestions or concerns that they might have with the manager and feel listened too.
There were enough staff available to work the service’s number of commissioned and contracted work hours. Staff understood their responsibility to report suspicions of harm and poor care practice. There were pre-employment checks in place to ensure that new staff were deemed suitable to work with the people they were supporting.
Staff were trained to provide effective care which met people’s individual support and care needs. Staff were supported by the manager to maintain and develop their skills through training. The standard of staff members’ work performance was reviewed by the management through observations and supervisions. This was to make sure that staff were competent and confident to deliver the care required.
The manager sought feedback about the quality of the service provided from people and/or their relatives. Staff were supported to raise any concerns or suggestions that they may have with the manager and felt listened to. There was a basic on-going quality monitoring process in place to identify areas of improvement required within the service. Where improvements had been identified, actions taken to reduce the risk of recurrence were recorded.
The CQC were not always informed of incidents that the provider was legally obliged to notify them of.
This inspection was carried out on 21, 22 and 23 October 2015 and we gave the service 48 hours’ notice of our inspection. This was the first inspection at this location.
Meadows Homecare Services is a domiciliary care agency registered to provide personal care for people living in their own homes. They specialise in offering 24 hour ‘live in’ care support. This means that there are staff supporting people 24 hours a day seven days a week where needed. There were 15 people being supported with the regulated activity of personal care at the time of our inspection.
There was a registered manager 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.
The Care Quality Commission (CQC) is required by law to monitor the operation of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and report on what we find. There had been no applications made to the authorising agencies. Whilst staff demonstrated to us that they respected people’s choice about how they wished to be supported. Staff were not able to demonstrate a robust understanding of MCA and DoLS to ensure that people did not have their freedom restricted. The lack of understanding increased the risk that staff would not be able to identify and report back to the office concerns that people were having their freedom restricted in an unlawful manner.
Individual risks to people were identified by staff. Plans were put into place to minimise these risks to enable people to live as safe and independent a life as possible. People’s risk assessments and care and support plans sometimes lacked detailed information. This included limited guidance for staff around people’s identified health conditions. Arrangements were in place to ensure that people were supported with the safe management of medication.
People were assisted to access a range of external health care professionals and were supported to maintain their health. People’s health and nutritional needs were met.
People who used the service were supported by staff in a respectful and caring way. People had individualised care and support plans in place which recorded their care and support needs. These plans prompted staff on any assistance a person may require. Staff supported people to maintain their interests and links with the local community.
People and their relatives were able to raise any suggestions or concerns that they might have with the registered manager and staff felt listened too.
There were enough staff available to work the service’s number of commissioned and contracted work hours. Staff understood their responsibility to report poor care practice. There were pre-employment safety checks in place to ensure that new staff were deemed suitable to work with the people they were supporting.
Staff were trained to provide effective care which met people’s individual support and care needs. Staff were supported by the registered manager to maintain their skills through training. The standard of staff members’ work performance was reviewed by the management through observations and supervisions. This was to make sure that staff were competent and confident to deliver this care.
The registered manager sought feedback about the quality of the service provided from people who used the service by telephone monitoring. Staff meetings took place and staff were supported to raise any concerns or suggestions that they may have. These meeting were also used to update staff about the service. There was an on-going quality monitoring process in place to identify areas of improvement required within the service. Where improvements had been identified the registered manager had actions in place to make the necessary amendments.