Background to this inspection
Updated
26 March 2019
The inspection
We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection checked 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.
Inspection team:
Two inspectors and one expert by experience completed the inspection. An expert by experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.
Mears Care is a domiciliary care agency which provides personal care to people in their own homes.
The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.
Notice of inspection:
We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection visit because we needed to be sure that the registered manager would be available.
Inspection site visit activity started on 7 February 2019 and ended on 22 February 2019. This included visiting the office location to speak with the registered manager, interview staff and review care records and policies and procedures. After our initial visit we then contacted people and professionals by telephone and email to obtain feedback on the service. We also requested further documents and information from the registered manager.
What we did:
Prior to the inspection we reviewed information we held about the service including statutory notifications which include information the provider is required to send us by law. We also looked at the Provider Information Return (PIR). The PIR gives us information about what the service does well and any planned improvements.
During the inspection we spoke with the registered manager and five members of staff. We spoke with 15 people who used the service and two relatives. We looked at six people’s care records including their medication records and daily notes. We looked at five staff member’’ recruitment records. We reviewed training and supervision records and documents relating to the management of the service including complaints and compliments, satisfaction surveys and quality audits.
Updated
26 March 2019
About the service: Mears Care Laindon is a domiciliary care agency providing personal care to people in their own homes. At the time of inspection there were 221 people using the service.
People’s experience of using this service:
Feedback from people we spoke with regarding the service was generally positive with one notable exception, the quality and consistency of communication between themselves and the management team. This impacted on the quality of the service people received. The mixed feedback we received also showed there were marked variations in the experiences of people using the service which demonstrated inconsistencies in how systems and processes were applied in practice. The failings we found had been identified by the provider but the improvements required had not always been sustained or consistently applied.
Whilst people were not always positive about the management of the service, people were positive about the care and support they received on a day to day basis and spoke highly of staff.
A very good feature of the service was the fact that people were supported by regular care staff. This meant people benefitted by being cared for by staff who knew them well and with whom they had developed a good rapport. This continuity of care was highly valued by people.
People felt safe using the service and staff knew how to keep people safe from the risk of harm. Risks to people had been assessed, however these sometimes lacked detail and were not always tailored to reflect people’s individual needs.
We made a recommendation about risk assessment and management.
Medicines were safely managed. There were sufficient staff deployed to safely meet people’s needs who had been safely recruited. Good infection control practices were used by staff to prevent the spread of infection.
Staff received training, supervision and appraisals to help them develop the necessary knowledge and skills to be competent in their role. Staff understood how to help people make decisions so that people had choice and control over their lives.
Where required, the service helped people to have enough to eat and drink and monitored people at risk of malnutrition or dehydration. Some people expressed dissatisfaction with the skills of some staff with regard to food preparation.
We made a recommendation about matching staff to people to ensure people’s needs and preferences were consistently met.
Staff were kind and caring and regularly went the extra mile. People were treated respectfully and with dignity and their privacy was respected.
The timing of care visits was not consistently person-centred as they did not always respect people’s routines and preferences. However, care staff took a person-centred approach in their daily practice when providing support by listening to people and providing care the way they wanted.
People were provided with information on how to make a complaint and systems were in place to respond appropriately. The views of people were sought to drive improvements, however feedback showed that improvements were not always sustained.
Staff were included in the running of the service. Staff told us the management team were supportive and they enjoyed working at the service.
Rating at last inspection:
Good (report published May 2016)
Why we inspected:
This was a planned inspection based on the rating at the last inspection. The overall rating is Good.
Follow up:
We will continue to monitor the service through the information we receive.