Future Care & Support Service

People’s experience of using this service:

We were not able to speak with either people using this service however our findings suggested the quality and safety of the service remains inconsistent. A staff member told us they felt supported and showed care and concern for the person they supported. A healthcare professional spoke positively about the service and its benefits for a person. Another person continued to experience late calls and this issue had not been adequately addressed as found at our last inspection in June 2018. Records were not accurately maintained and staff had not received all training relevant to the support they provided.

The provider had gathered people’s feedback on occasions and this was often positive. Improvements were still required to systems and processes to ensure people consistently received a good, safe and effective service.

More information is in the full report.

Rating at last inspection: Requires Improvement; June 2018.

Why we inspected: We inspected this service as this was scheduled based on the previous inspection rating.

Enforcement: This inspection identified a continued breach of the regulations around governance. We found the provider was also in breach of their conditions because they had failed to appropriate notify the Commission of a change to their registered location. Please see the end of the full report for action we have told provider to take.

Follow up: After our inspection we shared our findings with the local authority. We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received we may inspect sooner.

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

This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats in the community. At the time of our inspection three people were receiving personal care from the provider.

There was a registered manager, but they were not present during the inspection. 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 supported by staff who had received training in how to protect people from abuse and were aware of their responsibilities to report any concerns they may have.

People felt safe when supported by staff but risks assessments had not been completed which would provide staff with information on how to support people safely.

Systems were in place to ensure people were supported by sufficient numbers of safely recruited staff. There was no system in place to monitor that staff attended calls at the correct time.

Staff were aware of their responsibilities to support people to take their medicines, but care plans were not in place for this and the prompting of medicines was not recorded consistently.

People were protected from the spread of infection as staff had access to the appropriate personal protective equipment.

Where accidents and incidents took place, the information was recorded but was not analysed to identify any potential trends or actions to take to reduce the risk of events re-occurring.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People were supported by staff who they described as kind and caring. Staff treated people with dignity and respect and supported people to make choices regarding their daily living. People were encouraged and supported to retain their independence.

People were involved in the development of their initial care plan but records seen were not accurate and up to date. People were supported by staff who knew them well and understood their likes, dislikes and what was important to them.

People had no complaints but were confident if they did raise a concern, it would be dealt with appropriately.

Governance systems were not in place to provide the registered manager with an oversight of the service. Areas of concern that had been identified on inspection had not been identified by the registered manager or members of the management team.

Both staff and people supported by the service, were complimentary of the registered manager. Staff felt supported and listened to by both the registered manager and their colleagues.

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

Following our visit we also spoke with five people who used the service by telephone to ask them about their experiences of the service. The people we spoke with had mixed opinions about the care and support they received. Comments included: 'I think they are brilliant, they are so helpful'; 'I have nothing but good things to say about them' and 'They do nothing for me.'

Overall we found the care and support had improved since our last visit. People received more timely visits and most people felt they received the care they needed.

Processes for the recruitment of staff helped to ensure that people were cared for by suitably skilled and experienced staff.

Staff had access to equipment and guidance so that they could minimise the risk of cross infection to people receiving a service.

The provider had systems in place to improve the quality of the service people received. Staff described improved communication between staff and managers to ensure people received the care they needed. People also received more contact with managers so that any issues arising were dealt with more quickly leading to fewer complaints.

People receiving respite care were generally more satisfied with the service than people who received home care. People using the respite service told us 'The staff go beyond the call of duty'. Another person said 'It's (the service) been good.' People using the home care service raised issues relating to staff turning up late and difficulties contacting the provider if they wanted to raise a concern.

We found that staff rotas did not give adequate time for carers to travel between people. The current complaints system did not provide assurance that complaints were being dealt with consistently and had where possible been resolved to everyone's satisfaction.