Jeremys Carebuddies Limited

Updated 16 November 2021

The inspection

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team

The inspection team consisted of one 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.

Service and service type

This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care and treatment of disease disorder and injury to people living in their own houses and flats.

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. This was because the service is small, and people are often out, and we wanted to be sure the registered manager would be available to give us access to the records. Inspection activity started on 24 May 2021 and ended on the 14 June 2021.

What we did before the inspection

The provider was not asked to complete a provider information return prior to this inspection. This is information we require providers to send us to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We took this into account when we inspected the service and made the judgements in this report. We used all of this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection

During our site visit on 24 May 2021 we met with the registered manager and care co-ordinator. We reviewed three people’s care records and their associated documents including their daily notes. We looked at three staff files in relation to recruitment and training. A variety of records relating to the management of the service, including policies and procedures were reviewed.

On the 28 May 2021, we telephoned and attempted to speak with 11 people and/or their relatives. We were successful at speaking with one person and five relatives about their experience of the care provided. On the 14 June 2021 we wrote to eight staff and received two replies.

After the inspection

We continued to seek clarification from the provider to validate evidence found. We looked at training data and policies and procedures.

Updated 16 November 2021

About the service

Jeremys Carebuddies Limited is a domiciliary care agency providing personal care and support to people living in their own homes. They are registered to provide care to all adults including those who may be living with dementia and have disabilities. The provider is also registered to provide the regulated activity of treatment of disease, disorder or injury. We did not inspect this regulated activity on this occasion.

Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also consider any wider social care provided. At the time of our inspection they were offering personal care to 13 people.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

Risks to people had been assessed by the provider and reviewed. Care workers had received medicines training and refresher training, and medicines administration was undertaken in an appropriate manner.

We found one of the three electronic records we looked at did not always contain information which was kept in paper files in people’s homes. There was a danger therefore office staff might not be fully aware of the guidance staff were following. This indicated electronic records had not always been robustly audited.

People and relatives spoke positively about their care workers and the care they received. Some relatives mentioned care workers sometimes ran a little late, but none felt this was a problem. People and relatives told us they thought the service was provided in a safe manner and found the registered manager was accessible and responsive to any concerns they raised.

Care workers had received infection control training and were provided with personal protective equipment (PPE) to protect themselves and the people they offered a service to from the risk of cross infection.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. People gave their written consent for their care and treatment and if someone acted on their behalf the provider checked their had a legal right to do so.

The registered manager assessed people prior to offering a service to determine their support needs and their preferences. The care plans were person centred and contained guidance for staff about how people wanted their care provided.

The registered manager had recruited a new care co-ordinator to support with the management of the agency. They had improved communication systems with people and staff.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection (and update)

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection of this service (published 25 September 2019) and breaches of legal requirements were found. There were breaches of regulation 9 (Person centred care), regulation 11 (Need for consent) and regulation 17 (Good governance). The provider completed an action plan after the last inspection to show what they would do and by when to improve.

At this inspection we found they were no longer in breach of the regulations 9, 11 and 17. We found whilst the provider was no longer in breach of the regulations they were still rated as requires improvement in the well- led key question. This was because the provider did not work in partnership with the CQC and did not always facilitate inspection visits. In addition, although much improved since the last inspection they had not identified through checks and audits an electronic care plan was not updated in line with the person’s current moving and handling requirements in a timely manner.

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection to check the provider had completed actions to address the breaches identified at our previous inspection of July and August 2019.

Enforcement

We are mindful of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on our regulatory function. This meant we took account of the exceptional circumstances arising as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic when considering what enforcement action was necessary and proportionate to keep people safe as a result of this inspection.

The last rating for this service was requires improvement and we found improvement had been made and they were no longer in breach of the regulations and the service has improved to a rating of good overall.

Follow up

We will return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.