You are here

Archived: Keystone Healthcare Limited

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 18 November 2013
Date of Publication: 18 December 2013
Inspection Report published 18 December 2013 PDF

The service should have quality checking systems to manage risks and assure the health, welfare and safety of people who receive care (outcome 16)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Benefit from safe quality care, treatment and support, due to effective decision making and the management of risks to their health, welfare and safety.

How this check was done

We looked at the personal care or treatment records of people who use the service, carried out a visit on 18 November 2013, talked with people who use the service and talked with carers and / or family members. We talked with staff.

Our judgement

The provider had an effective system to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people receive.

Reasons for our judgement

People who use the service, their representatives and staff were asked for their views about their care and treatment and they were acted on.

The provider sent out a satisfaction survey people and/or their representatives once a year. The manager told us they were last sent out in May 2013. We looked at the document which collated and summarised the responses to this survey. We saw that the feedback from the 26 people that had completed the survey was all positive.

For example all 26 respondents:-

• agreed that care staff had enough time to carry out the tasks in the care plan

• agreed that the support worker carried out all the tasks required

• said they felt involved in the planning of their care package

• said the support worker arrived on time and stayed for the full length of the call

• felt they had continuity of care

• felt staff were appropriately trained

Comments in the survey included:-

“Extremely happy with the care.”

“I feel very happy with the care I receive – you must hand pick the care staff.”

“Excellent organisation, always trying to improve the service.”

We saw there were records of complaints and/or concerns and the action taken to address them. No formal complaints had been received since our last visit. All 26 people completing the satisfaction survey confirmed they knew how to complain and how to contact the office. One person commented, “I haven’t got any complaints.” Another person said, “Whenever I ring the office I know any concerns or questions will be dealt with.”

We saw that the agency ran an annual “Service User’s Carer of the Year” award. This showed the people using the service had an opportunity to give feedback about the care staff working at the service.

The director told us they were undertaking a review of the management structure of Keystone Healthcare to open up more options for the service and to look at how to maintain good quality while expanding the service. During our visit we saw evidence of audits of personal files, timesheets, staff competency assessments, controlled documents and the recruitment process. This showed the service was developing a quality management system; this would help them achieve continuous quality improvement.

The provider may find it useful to note that not all audits and checks were being documented; for example the actions taken when the daily records were audited every month by the manager and care coordinator. The manager assured us actions were taken when any deficiencies were identified but agreed these were not being recorded appropriately to provide an audit trail. We discussed this with the manager, director and IT manager during our visit. They told us they would devise and introduce a system for recording these audits.