• Services in your home
  • Homecare service

Darethealthcare UK Limited

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Anerley Business Centre, Anerley Town Hall, Anerley Road, London, SE20 8BD (020) 8676 5678

Provided and run by:
Darethealthcare UK Limited

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about Darethealthcare UK Limited on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.

This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.

If you have concerns about Darethealthcare UK Limited, you can give feedback on this service.

6 September 2017

During a routine inspection

This inspection took place on 6 September 2017 and was announced. We gave the provider 48 hours' notice of the inspection because we needed to be sure the manager and staff would be in the office. At our last inspection in August 2016 we found the service to be meeting regulatory requirements and was rated 'Requires Improvement'. This was because improvements that had been made following our inspection of the service in March 2016 had not been operational for a sustained amount of time for us to be sure the service was good.

Darethealthcare UK Limited provides personal care and support services to older adults living in their own homes within the London Borough of Bromley and its surrounding areas. At the time of our inspection there were approximately 34 people using 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

Assessments and care plans were in place to support people where risks to their health and wellbeing had been identified. There were appropriate safeguarding procedures in place. Recruitment checks took place before staff started work and there was enough staff to meet people’s needs. The registered manager and staff had a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and acted according to this legislation. Staff had completed an induction when they started work and received training relevant to the needs of people using the service. Care plans detailed people’s nutritional and support needs. People were supported to access health and social care professionals when they needed them.

People were provided with information about the service. People said staff were kind and caring and their privacy and dignity was maintained. People were consulted about their care and care plans were in place that provided information for staff on how to support people safely and appropriately. People were aware of the complaints procedure. There were systems in place to monitor the quality of the service provided to people. The provider took into account the views of people using the service. Staff said they enjoyed working at the service and they received good support. There was an out of hours on call system in operation that ensured management support was available to people and staff when required.

25 August 2016

During a routine inspection

We previously carried out an announced comprehensive inspection of this service on 18 March 2016, at which breaches of legal requirements were found. This was because medicines were not safely managed and risks to people had not always been adequately assessed. These issues placed people at risk of unsafe care. We also found that staff had not always received regular supervision or training as necessary to enable them to carry out their roles. Appropriate recruitment checks for staff were not always in place, and the provider did not have effective systems in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service.

Following the inspection, we imposed conditions on the provider requiring them to carry out risk assessments, including assessments on the risks associated with medicines for all people using the service. We also required the provider to send us monthly audit reports of people’s care files and medicines records. Additionally, we served a warning notice on the provider and registered manager requiring them to comply with the regulations.

We undertook this comprehensive inspection on 25 and 30 August 2016 to check that the provider had met the requirements of the enforcement action and requirement notices we took, and to rate the service.

Darethealthcare UK Limited is a domiciliary care provider located in the London Borough of Bromley providing care and support to 33 people across Bromley and the surrounding areas. There was a registered manager in post at the time of our 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.

At our comprehensive inspection of 25 and 30 August 2016 we found that the provider had taken appropriate action to ensure compliance with the regulations.

Medicines were safely managed. People's records contained a complete list of their prescribed medicines and included appropriate guidance on how to support people safely. Risks to people had been assessed and reviewed, with appropriate risk management plans in place to mitigate future risks. The provider had procedures and policies relating to safeguarding people from harm which were accessible to staff. Staff demonstrated an understanding of types of abuse to look out for and knew how to raise safeguarding concerns. The provider had taken appropriate action to ensure recruitment files contained appropriate pre-employment checks. There were sufficient staff deployed to meet people’s needs.

Staff received regular supervision and these were scheduled across the year. Staff were up to date with mandatory training requirements as identified by the provider. They understood their responsibilities in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA), and the manager acted according to this legislation. People were sufficiently supported with their food and drink requirements and to access healthcare services where necessary.

People told us that they felt staff were caring, and that their privacy and dignity was respected. Care plans were person centred and regularly reviewed. People were consulted about their care and support needs. Concerns and complaints were investigated and responded to in a timely and appropriate manner.

Quality assurance systems were in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service. The provider had made appropriate notifications to the CQC since the last inspection, and the registered manager understood when notifications should be made. People’s views were sought on the running of the service.

18 March 2016

During a routine inspection

This inspection took place on 18 March 2016 and was announced. Darethealthcare UK Limited is a domiciliary care agency that provides care and support for people living in the London Borough of Bromley and its surrounding areas.. At the time of this inspection 40 people were using the service, to receive personal care.

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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

During our inspection we found breaches of Regulations of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014 in respect of medicines, risk assessments, staff supervision appraisals and training and staff recruitment practices.

Risks to people had not always been identified or properly assessed, and action had not always been taken to manage risks safely. Risk assessments had not been regularly updated. Medicines were not safely managed by the service because records relating to the management of medicines were often not fully complete.

The provider did not operate effective systems to monitor and mitigate risks to people because issues were not identified at audit, and they had failed to find concerns we identified at inspection.

Staff did not always receive appropriate training or supervision as is necessary to enable them to carry out the duties they are employed to perform.

CQC is currently considering appropriate regulatory responses to address these above breaches in legal requirements. We will report on this at a later date.

There was also a breach of regulations as appropriate pre-employment checks were not always in place, including photographic identification prior to them commencing work. You can see the action we have asked the provider to take in respect of this breach of regulations at the back of this report.

People said they felt safe and staff treated them well. The service had appropriate safeguarding adults procedures in place and staff had a clear understanding of these procedures. There was a whistle-blowing procedure available and staff said they would use it if they needed to.

The manager had a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and acted according to this legislation. Staff had completed an induction when they started work and they were up to date with their training. People had access to health care professionals when they needed them.

People said they were treated with dignity and respect, and felt that staff were caring. People were supported to maintain a balanced diet, and had access to health care professionals when required.

The provider had a complaints procedure in place, and people felt their complaints would be dealt with effectively. Staff felt well supported by management, and the provider regularly conducted telephone and paper surveys which showed people were happy with the service.

2 October 2013

During a routine inspection

People and their relatives we spoke with told us that they were happy with the care and support they received from Darethealthcare UK Limited. People told us that their carers were 'friendly', 'reliable' and 'honest'. People told us that they were involved in their care planning and knew what was expected of staff. People felt their privacy and dignity were respected and they knew how to make a complaint if they were unhappy with the service.

We found that people and their relatives were involved in making decisions about their care and support needs. Each person using the service had a care and support plan in place to ensure that their needs were met. The provider had appropriate policies and procedures in place to safeguard vulnerable adults. Appropriate checks were undertaken before staff began work. We found that the provider had systems in place to regularly monitor the quality of the service that people received.

8 March 2013

During a routine inspection

Two people who used the service and their relatives we spoke with told us they were very happy with the service they received. People told us staff arrived on time, they were reliable and professional and that they cared for people in accordance with their care plans. People told us they had regular care staff and they felt safe with the care provided to them. One person's relative told us 'the carers are great, kind and gentle'.

All the people we spoke with told us they were involved in the planning of their care and had been asked for their views. People told us they felt able to call the agency's office if they had any concerns about the care and support provided. People also told us staff completed their tasks on time when delivering care and support planned for them.

We found that people were able to express their views and were involved in making decisions about their care and support needs. We also found that the provider had policies and procedures in place to ensure vulnerable adults were protected from abuse and staff had appropriate access to these policies.

We found that staff understood people's care needs and knew how to support them. Support was in place to ensure that staff received adequate training and supervision and to ensure they were appropriately supported to do their job effectively. The provider had systems in place to assess and monitor the quality of the service people received.

19 March 2012

During an inspection looking at part of the service

People and their family members told us that they were involved in their assessments, reviews and care planning process. People told us that they liked the carers and that they received the right level of care and support to meet their personal care needs. People told us that carers were usually on time and if they were going to be late they informed the person, did all the work they needed to do, and asked people if they needed anything else.

People told us that they felt safe and were able to express their views and concerns to the staff and manager. They said that they did not have any complaints about the agency and that they were generally happy with the service they received.

Family members told us that people appeared happy; that the carers were pleasant.

People told us that they did not experience communication difficulty with carers. They told us that the carers are helpful and understanding.

30 August 2011

During an inspection in response to concerns

Some people who use the service told us that their needs had not been met at all times. For example, one person said that their carer had not looked after them well and that they would prefer to have a different carer; another told us that the carer had shouted and was rude and did not listen to them.

Some people told us that the agency did not always listen to or act swiftly to resolve their concerns. Carers had told people to sign the daily activity log but people did not know what was written in the activity log and carers did not read it to them before they signed it.

Some people were unhappy with the carers visiting time, as these did not meet their assessed needs. One person said that the carers wanted them to eat at 4pm and to go to bed at 7pm. There was no evidence in some of the daily activity logs we looked at which demonstrated that carers' visited people's homes in line with care plans or that appropriate planned care had been provided at all times.