Archived: Sevacare - Wednesbury

The manager was registered with us as is required by law. 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.

People were kept safe from harm. Staff we spoke with were clear about how they could access and utilise the provider’s whistle blowing policy and that they knew how to keep people safe. People received their medicines appropriately, as and when they should, and staff were suitably trained to administer them. People were supported to take food and drinks in sufficient quantities to prevent malnutrition and dehydration. People were supported to ensure their health needs were met.

There was a suitable amount of staff on duty with the skills, experience and training in order to meet people’s needs. They obtained consent where possible and explained their actions to people. Staff maintained people’s privacy and dignity whilst encouraging them to remain as independent as possible. People and their relatives were involved in the planning of care and staff delivered care in line with what was considered to be people’s preferences and wishes.

The complaints procedure had been given to people and they understood it. People were confident that their concerns would be listened to and acted upon. People were asked for feedback and their replies helped to shape the way that care was provided. People, their relatives and staff spoke positively about the approachable nature and leadership skills of the registered manager. Structures for supervision allowing staff to understand their roles and responsibilities were in place.

Systems for updating and reviewing risk assessments and care plans to reflect people’s level of support needs and any potential related risks were effective. Quality assurance audits were undertaken regularly. The registered manager had also ensured that checks on staff were undertaken periodically. We received notifications regarding incidents and accidents, so that we could see how staff responded to people’s needs, and the action taken to reduce the risk of reoccurrence.

During our previous inspection we also found that people were not confident in raising concerns and there was no evidence improvements that had been made were maintained. During this inspection we found that these issues had been adequately addressed.

We gave the manager short notice of our inspection. Sevacare Wednesbury was provided care and support to 278 people at the time of our inspection. We wrote to 60 people who used the service, and we received 14 replies. We visited the office and spoke with three care workers, the registered manager and two senior managers who supported us with the inspection of this agency. We talked with the manager and looked in detail at the care records for 10 people. We saw data held electronically by the agency in relation to records about staff.

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary describes the records we looked at and what people using the service and staff told us.

If you want to see the evidence that supports our summary, please read the full report.

Is the service safe?

We saw that the service had systems in place to identify and respond to allegations of abuse. Staff understood their role in safeguarding the people they supported. The manager had a good understanding of issues around safeguarding and their role in protecting people. There were policies and procedures in place to make sure that unsafe practice would be identified and people would be protected. Staff we spoke with were aware of these policies.

A relative told us, 'I feel safe to leave X alone with the carers.' No one who replied to us said that they had any concerns about being discriminated against. Nearly three quarters of them said that they felt they were always treated with respect.

A relative told us, 'Very safety conscious. When I was visiting my relation the lady was just leaving. She stopped me and asked me who I was and came back into the flat to verify my identity. I thought that was excellent as I could have been anybody trying to take advantage.'

Is the service effective?

People received the care and support they required to meet their needs and maintain their health and welfare. We saw that people who received care and support from the agency had a care record that included assessments of their individual needs and risks. The care plan had been developed to meet those assessed needs, but not always with the involvement of the person or their representative. One relative told us, 'When the regular carers attend, everything is fine and all things that need to be done are. However if a new carer is sent they do not read the care plan and most of the time do not do everything they are supposed to.'

The records we looked at had been reviewed on a regular basis, or earlier if required. We viewed records which showed us training and development was provided to staff to enable them to deliver support safely and to an appropriate standard. A person told us, 'We feel very valued by staff.' People and their relatives who replied to us told us staff were knowledgeable about their individual care needs and they were generally confident in staff abilities when support was being given. A relative told us, 'The care for mum is above what I would normally expect.'

Is the service caring?

Many people and relatives who responded to us made positive comments about their regular carers being supportive, good company and helpful. A relative told us, 'Care workers caring attitude is good, people skills are excellent.' Other people were not as pleased when they had carers that were not their usual ones. One person told us, 'I don't feel safe when other carers I don't know come.'

The majority of people told us they were happy with the care and support provided by the agency. One person told us, 'Very helpful, above and beyond her duties. Good friend.' Another person said, 'Good company, good listener and supportive.'

Relatives told us staff were caring and kind. A relative said, 'Care workers caring attitude is good, people skills are excellent.' A person told us, 'They do all their tasks and have a chat, they talk with respect and are helpful.'

Staff told us they were clear about their roles and responsibilities to respect people's privacy and dignity. A relative told us, 'The carers we have are on the whole, satisfactory. Some of them are extremely kind and helpful.'

Is the service responsive?

We spoke with the manager who told us they involved other professionals in people's care when their needs changed. This was so their care could continue to be provided safely and appropriately. One person told us, 'They do listen when I have a problem with the carers.'

Some relatives told us that complaints made to the agency were not always responded to. One relative told us, 'I complained about the care plan. They ignored me. I gave them 3 copies on different occasions and they have lost them all.' A different relative said, 'The admin staff at the agency are unhelpful.'

Not all of the people who responded to our questions felt that they had a good response from the agency. A relative told us, 'When the service first started, carers did not arrive on several occasions putting my mum at risk. I never really got an apology. Also trying to set a meeting with them is impossible as they often don't turn up and know nothing about it when I phone.' Another person told us, 'I have complained about the behaviour of one carer. I have not seen them again but I do not know what action the office took.'

We saw evidence that showed that the manager responded to complaints and concerns in a timely fashion and that generally people were satisfied with the care they received.

Is the service well led?

The manager was aware of their responsibilities in meeting the essential standards of quality and safety. We saw the service had systems in place to ensure people were regularly consulted about their views and ideas on how the service should be run. This was done by means of satisfaction surveys with people and individual meetings.

Some people told us that things could be improved. A person told us, 'Time keeping for appointments can be erratic.' Another person told us, 'Frequently the ones who come are not the ones on the rota. Very often I do not receive a rota so I do not know who is coming or at what time.'

We saw quality assurance systems were in place. Staff felt well supported and records we reviewed confirmed that staff were appropriately trained and supported to carry out their role safely. A person told us, 'All care provided for me, I have no problem, I'm happy with the service.'

Most of the people that we spoke with said that staff respected their privacy and dignity whilst providing care and support. We found that People's privacy, dignity and independence were respected.

People and their relatives that we spoke with said that staff provided care and support with their consent. However, we found that the provider was not acting in full accordance with legal requirements. This is because the provider was not assuming that people who used the service had the capacity to make informed decision for themselves and where they believed people did not have the capacity, they have failed to undertake a capacity assessment to establish that this is the case.

The majority of the people that used service and relatives that we spoke with told us that they were satisfied with the care they received from their regular care workers. One person told us, '99% of the time everything is very good.' However, we found that care and support was not planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure people's needs were consistently being met.

Everyone that we spoke with told us that they felt safe with the staff that supported them. We found that people who use the service were protected from the risk of abuse, because the provider had taken reasonable steps to identify the possibility of abuse and prevent abuse from happening.

All the people that we spoke with during the inspection were complementary about the regular care workers that supported them. We found that people were cared for by staff who were supported to deliver care and treatment safely and to an appropriate standard.

The majority of people and their relatives that we spoke with said that they were satisfied with the standard of service that they received from their regular care worker. One person told us, 'It's alright so far and I have no real complaints to make.' However, not everyone that we spoke with were confident about the quality of the service. We found that the provider did not have an effective system to demonstrate consistent and sustained improvements to the quality of service people received.