Background to this inspection
Updated
11 March 2015
We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.
The provider was given 48 hours’ notice prior to the inspection visit which took place on 14 January 2015. Phone calls to people in receipt of care and support from this care agency were carried out during the week beginning 19 January 2015 in order to gather their views of the service provided.
The inspection team consisted of an inspector and an expert by experience. An expert-by-experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.
We looked at information .that was gathered and reviewed before the inspection such as the action plan received from the provider following the last inspection, complaints and notifications. A notification is information about important events which the service is required to send to us by law.
We spoke with 31 people who received support from this care agency and four relatives. We spoke with six care staff, one care co-ordinator, the manager and regional manager. We looked through six sets of care plans, six people’s risk assessments, six medication records charts and a large number of daily record notes.
Since our inspection in June 2014 we had made contact on a regular basis with the social care quality monitoring officers from the local authority, who were working with this agency to ensure the improvements required were made accordingly.
Updated
11 March 2015
This inspection was announced and started on 14 January 2015.
At the last inspection on 16 and 17 June 2014 we asked the provider to take action to make improvements to the care and welfare provided to people, staffing levels, support and training for staff and effective systems that monitored the quality of the service. At this inspection we found the action required by the provider had been taken. However, on-going improvements were still in progress for recruiting staff.
This is a domiciliary care service providing care and support to approximately 270 people living in their own homes across the county of Norfolk. It did not have a registered manager at the time of this inspection. However, a manager had recently been recruited and informed us they had started the process of being registered. 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
People receiving a service from Care UK told us that they were supported safely by staff who were kind and courteous. Potential risks were assessed and action was taken to minimise or reduce the risks.
Staff were aware of potential abuse, knew the signs to look for and would act appropriately if they had any concerns abuse may be happening.
The service had a robust out of hour’s system to cover any emergencies that may occur. Staff were fully aware of the system and had access to a duty officer whenever required.
The service had a shortfall in the number of care staff required and another care agency was covering the shortfall. However, the manager was in the process of recruiting to ensure enough staff were employed in the future to deliver the service required.
People who required support with taking their medicines were assisted by staff who were competent and trained in the administration of medicines.
People were supported by staff who had the skills to support them properly. Staff received induction and training to enable them to carry out their roles effectively. Staff had a clear understanding of the Mental Capacity Act and knew what to do if they felt a person was being deprived of their liberty. The majority of staff held a recognised qualification in care.
The service had improved the support to staff by providing more localised and accessible access to office facilities and senior staff contact.
Meals prepared by staff were offered with choice and people were supported to eat and drink sufficient amounts.
Staff had access to health care professionals with all phone numbers recorded on individual care plans to use as and when required.
The staff who supported people regularly were praised highly by the people using the service and their relatives. Where there was inconsistency of staff people were not benefitting from consistency in care support provided.
The majority of staff were supporting people appropriately and effectively by offering the individual care required to promote good health and offer reassurance when people were a bit apprehensive. The minority of staff provided were not always effective and improvements in staff recruitment were required.
Some improvements recently made were evident at this inspection. New methods had been introduced to monitor the quality of the service provided. The manager was at the centre of all the activity taking place and was aware of any concerns or complaints. They ensured that improvements were being made and that timely action taken.
The improvements recently introduced, the sharing of information and the openness within the whole staff team had improved the working relationships within the service.