• Services in your home
  • Homecare service

Archived: Newcastle Community Care Services DCA

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

First Floor, Park View House, Front Street, Long Benton, Newcastle Upon Tyne, Tyne and Wear, NE7 7TZ 0333 321 8292

Provided and run by:
Mears Homecare Limited

Important: This service was previously registered at a different address - see old profile

Latest inspection summary

On this page

Background to this inspection

Updated 29 April 2015

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This inspection took place on 17, 19, 20 and 25 February and 2 March 2015 and was unannounced. The inspection was carried out by two adult social care inspectors, three experts by experience and one specialist advisor. An expert by experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service and a specialist advisor is a person who specialises in a particular area of health and social care, for example medicines, moving and handling or quality assurance.

We reviewed information we held about the service, including the notifications we had received from the provider about serious injuries or safeguarding concerns. Prior to the inspection we contacted local authority contracts teams and safeguarding officers from across the areas where the service operates. We also contacted the local Healthwatch organisation by email to obtain their opinion of the service. Healthwatch is an independent consumer champion that gathers and represents the views of the public about health and social care services in England. None of the people who responded raised any concerns.

We contacted health and social care professionals by telephone before and following the inspection to seek their opinion of the service. These included community nurses, social workers, advocates, occupational therapists and speech and language therapists.

We contacted people and their relatives from across the geographical areas the service covers; South Shields, Newcastle, Darlington, Sunderland, Middlesbrough, Jarrow, Hebburn and Boldon Colliery.

We visited and spoke with 11 people in their own homes and spoke with 31 by telephone. We also spoke with 12 relatives.

We spoke with a number of staff during the inspection, including the registered manager, the quality assurance manager, four office based staff, two team leaders and fourteen care staff.

We looked at a range of care records which included the care records of the people we visited in their homes (11) and a further 15 at the office. We also checked the personnel files of 10 staff members. We looked at accident and incident records, training records, quality assurance checks, health and safety information, risk assessments, meeting minutes and surveys undertaken.

Overall inspection

Good

Updated 29 April 2015

The unannounced inspection took place on 17, 19, 20 and 25 February and 2 March 2015. We last inspected the service 28 January 2014 when we found the service was meeting all the regulations that we inspected.

At the time of our inspection, Newcastle Community Care Services DCA provided home care and housing support for 513 adults and children living in their own homes, which meant staff made over 6000 visits a week to support these people. These figures will fluctuate due to the nature of the service.

The service had 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 considered people were not fully protected against the risks associated with medicines because information was not always in place to manage ‘as required’ medicines.

We found risk assessments required improvement in the way they were written and the terminology used.

There were safeguarding policies and procedures in place. Staff knew what actions they would take if abuse was suspected. The provider had dealt with previous safeguarding concerns appropriately.

Accidents and incidents were recorded and dealt with effectively by the provider. Where issues (including complaints) had occurred, actions had been taken and lessons learnt.

Staffing levels were maintained by timely and safe recruitment procedures. The provider had a new system in place to ensure rota allocations were monitored so people received their care ‘call’ on time and staff were kept safe. The registered manager told us they tried to ensure people were visited by the same care staff but that was not always possible due to sickness or holidays.

Staff had received a 12 week induction and completed appropriate training. Where gaps in training had been identified, the provider ensured staff received additional training, for example, in dysphasia or dementia. Staff said they felt supported by their line manager and the provider.

The registered manager was fully aware of the Mental Capacity Act 2005, particularly in relation to the court of protection and lasting power of attorney. There were policies and procedures in place and staff had been trained. Where people required the support of an advocate, staff had helped to secure their services.

Some people received support with eating and drinking as part of their care package. People were provided with meals they had chosen and preferred and staff ensured drinks were left between visits for people if they required them.

Staff promoted people’s independence and treated people with warmth and kindness in a respectful and dignified manner. People’s likes and dislikes had been recorded and staff knew the people they supported. Care plans and associated documents were built around the person and involved them, their family and professionals.

There was a complaints procedure in place and people and their relatives knew how to access and use it.

The service was well led with a dedicated registered manager in place, who was committed to providing a good service and had implemented various quality checks to monitor this.