You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 3 October 2017

This inspection took place on 19 July 2017 and was announced. Carepoint Services is registered to provide personal care and support to people living in their own homes. At the time of the inspection there were 136 people using the service.

The service has a registered manager. 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.

The last time we inspected this service in April 2016, we found a continued breach in relation to safe care and treatment. We had found that there were unexplained gaps in people’s medicine administration records (MARs), therefore people were at risk of not receiving their medicines as prescribed. We also had found staff did not take prompt actions when concerns about people’s ability to manage their medicines were identified. We had found that the registered provider did not have robust recruitment systems in place. We made a recommendation that the registered provider use a reputable source or system to monitor and check that staff had the right to work in the United Kingdom.

At this inspection, we followed up on the breaches of regulations to see if the registered provider had made improvements to the service. The registered provider had taken action to meet the regulations we inspected.

Staff managed people’s medicines safely. People’s medicine administration records (MARs) were accurate and updated by staff once people had their prescribed medicines. The registered manager completed audits of medicines management to help them identify and address any errors.

Staff were supported with appropriate training, induction, appraisal and supervision. This allowed staff to obtain skills and knowledge and share their personal and professional needs with their line manager.

People had sufficient numbers of staff to provide care and support to them. Safe recruitment processes were followed to ensure the safety of people by employing suitable staff. The registered manager had systems in place to ensure that checks on staff entitlement to work in the UK were carried out promptly and as required.

Staff understood how to protect people from risks associated with harm and abuse. Staff had guidance from safeguarding procedures and policies to identify and report any allegations of abuse to the local authority.

Risks to people’s health and well-being were identified. Staff had access to risk assessment outcomes and guidance to support them to reduce risks and keep people safe.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. People were cared for within the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) principles. People were provided with enough information to allow them to consent to care and support.

People said staff knew them well and treated them with kindness and compassion. People told us that staff respected them and protected their dignity and privacy. People had access to health care services when their health needs deteriorated. Staff provided people with meals that met their preferences and nutritional needs. Staff followed health professionals’ guidance regarding people’s specific needs.

Care assessments identified people’s needs. Care plans detailed how the service arranged care so people’s needs were met. This enabled people to maintain their health and well-being.

The registered manager sought people’s views on the service, including the quality of care provided. Staff and the registered manager monitored and reviewed the quality of care through audits, spot check visits, and reviews of the service. The Care Quality Commission was kept informed of incidents that occurred at the service.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 3 October 2017

The service was safe. People's medicines were safely managed. People had enough safely recruited staff providing care and support for them. Risks to people were identified and managed by staff. Staff understood how to protect people from the risk of harm and abuse.

Effective

Good

Updated 3 October 2017

The service was effective. Staff were supported with an induction, training, appraisal and regular supervision. Healthcare services were available to people when their care needs changed. Meals were prepared for people that met their preferences and needs. People made care decisions and provided consent to care. Staff had an awareness of the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA), and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

Caring

Good

Updated 3 October 2017

The service was caring. Staff were caring, compassionate and kind. Staff respected people�s dignity and privacy. Independence was promoted so people were able to manage their care and support needs in line with their own wishes.

Responsive

Good

Updated 3 October 2017

The service was responsive. Care assessments were completed with people that identified their needs. People had care delivered that met their needs. There was a complaints process at the service which people were familiar with.

Well-led

Good

Updated 3 October 2017

The service was well-led. The registered manager and staff reviewed and monitored the service. Staff understood their role and responsibilities and felt supported by the registered manager. People were able to provide their opinions on the quality of care. The registered manager understood their responsibilities in line with their registration with the Care Quality Commission.