Archived: Ocean Care

This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats in the community. It provides a service to older adults. CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also take into account any wider social care provided. At the time of our inspection, one person received the regulated activity of personal care from the service.

The person lived in their own home and told us they felt safe using the service. However, systems were not always clear to help the person manage their finances safely and we shared this information with the local authority after our inspection for further consideration. The person’s risks were known to their carer, (the care manager) who had supported them for a long time, and the person told us they received their medicines on time. However, records relating to this were not always accurately maintained and monitored to ensure the person always received safe support.

Systems to assess, monitor and improve the quality and safety of the service were not always effective and checks were not always carried out as planned. The provider could not evidence that staff supporting people were fit and of good character. They told us they had recruitment processes in place to help them recruit staff safely however some documentation was not available to evidence this.

The provider was aware of how to identify and report safeguarding concerns and there were sufficient numbers of staff available to care for the person.

The person made their own choices about their care and told us their choices were respected. The person told us they were satisfied with their care. They were supported to access further healthcare support as needed and to have meals of their preference. The care manager felt supported in their role and was familiar with the person’s needs. The provider had arranged some guidance and training for staff, however the provider did not always keep track of staff training plans and requirements.

The person told us their carer was kind and caring, and we saw they had a good rapport. The care manager understood how to help promote the person’s dignity. The person told us they felt able to complain and the provider had a system in place to ensure complaints would be addressed. However, the person was not supported to be involved in discussions and decisions about their care as far as possible. Care plans did not always fully reflect the person’s choices and support needs.

We received positive feedback about the service and the person told us they were happy with their care. The provider referred to some current good practice guidelines and understood their responsibilities to the Commission.

You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.

Oceans Care is registered to provide personal care services to people in their own homes. On the day of the inspection, there was one person receiving support. We were therefore not able to award a rating as we could not answer all the KLOES against the activity. The provider does provider other activities to people which are not regulated by us.

There was a registered manager in post. 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.

We found that care staff were able to explain how people were kept safe, the action they would take where people were at risk of harm and that they had received safeguarding training. The provider had sufficient care staff in place and staff were able to support people with their medicines as required.

Care staff were able to get the appropriate support to ensure they had the right skills and knowledge to meet the person’s needs. The provider was aware of the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (2005).

Care staff knew how to ensure the person’s independence, dignity and privacy was respected. Care staff were able to explain how they encouraged the person’s independence. We were unable to verify how the person was involved in the decision making process as they did not want to speak with us.

We found that an assessment and care planning process was in place to identify how the person’s needs were being met. The provider ensured there was a complaints process in place.

We found that the provider did not have a system in place to show when a review had taken place, who had attended and the outcome from the review.

The provider used questionnaires to gather stakeholders views on the service. The provider carried out quality assurance checks and audits on the service.