You are here

Kent Carers Limited - Head Office Requires improvement

We are carrying out checks at Kent Carers Limited - Head Office using our new way of inspecting services. We will publish a report when our check is complete.

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Requires improvement

Updated 7 February 2018

The inspection took place on 24 November and 19 and 29 December 2017. This inspection was announced.

This service is a domiciliary care agency based at an office in Dartford. It provides personal care to people living in their own homes. This included older people and younger adults some of whom were living with dementia, learning disabilities and physical disabilities. There were up to nine people using the service at the time of our inspection. At the time of this inspection most people had been assessed as having low care needs.

A registered manager had not been employed at the service since 19 May 2017. 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 inspection was supported by the provider and a company director of Kent Carers Limited.

The last inspection report for Kent Carers Limited - Head Office was published on 30 November 2016 following a comprehensive inspection on 24 October 2016. At that inspection we found three breaches of legal requirements in relation to Regulations 11, 17 and 18 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. We asked the provider to take action to meet the regulations.

After the inspection, the provider sent us an action plan on 15 December 2016, which detailed how they planned to address the breaches of Regulations.

At this inspection, we found improvements had been made.

The outcomes promoted in the providers policies and procedures were monitored by the provider. There were audits undertaken based on a learning analysis, to improve quality. Staff understood their roles in meeting the expected quality levels and staff were empowered to challenge poor practice.

The provider understood their responsibility to comply with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). The staff followed policies about Equality, Diversity and Human Rights.

People and their relatives had the opportunity to share their views about the service either face-to-face or by telephone.

There were enough staff deployed to meet people’s physical and social needs. Emergency on-call backup was in place.

The provider checked staff’s suitability to deliver personal care during the recruitment process. People’s medicines were managed and administered safely.

The provider trained and guided staff so that they understood their responsibilities to protect people from harm. Staff were encouraged and supported to raise any concerns. Staff understood the risks to people’s individual health and wellbeing and risks were recorded in their care plans.

Staff received training that matched people’s needs and staff were supported with supervision and with maintaining their skills.

Management systems were in use to minimise the risks from the spread of infection, staff received training about controlling infection and carried personal protective equipment like disposable gloves and apron’s.

We found a breach of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of this report.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 7 February 2018

The service was safe.

People experienced a service that made them feel safe. Staff knew what they should do to identify and raise safeguarding concerns.

The provider understood how to report safeguarding concerns and when to notify the appropriate agencies.

The provider used safe recruitment procedures.

General and individual health and risks were assessed. Systems were in place so that medicines were administered safely.

Incidents and accidents were recorded and monitored to reduce risk.

Effective

Good

Updated 7 February 2018

The service was effective.

People’s needs were assessed.

People were cared for by staff who knew their needs well.

Staff encouraged people to eat and drink enough.

Staff met with their managers to discuss their work performance and each member of staff had attained the skills they required to carry out their role.

The Mental Capacity Act 2005 was understood by the provider and staff received training about this.

Caring

Good

Updated 7 February 2018

The service was caring.

People had forged good relationships with staff so that they were comfortable and felt well treated.

People were treated as individuals and able to make choices about their care.

People had been involved in planning their care and their views were taken into account.

People were treated with dignity and respect. Staff understood how to maintain people’s privacy.

Responsive

Good

Updated 7 February 2018

The service was responsive.

Staff provided care to people as individuals. People were provided with care when they needed it based on a care plan about them.

Information about people was updated with their involvement so that staff only provided care that was up to date.

People were encouraged to raise any issues they were unhappy about.

Well-led

Requires improvement

Updated 7 February 2018

The service was not always well led.

The provider had not met all of the conditions of their registration as they had not employed a registered manager.

The provider operated systems and policies that were focused on the quality of service delivery.

There were structures in place to monitor and review the risks that may present themselves as the service was delivered.

Staff understood they were accountable for the quality of the care they delivered.