The Care Quality Commission

Archived: ACME Care

Unit 5, 2nd Floor, Cashs Business Centre, Widdrington Road, Coventry, West Midlands, CV1 4PB (024) 7625 1199

Provided and run by:
Acme Care Limited

Important: This service is now registered at a different address - see new profile

All Inspections

During a check to make sure that the improvements required had been made

Following our inspection visit to ACME Care on 4 July 2012 we asked the provider to make improvements to the record keeping in the agency. This was because records we viewed were not always accurate, up to date or available to be viewed. We asked the provider to send us a report explaining what action they had taken to become compliant with Regulation 20, Records. The providers report told us they had made several improvements to how records were being managed.

The report told us that the agency ensured people now signed their care plan and their service agreement. Care plans were in the process of being reviewed and updated. The risk management procedure had been reviewed and more detailed risk assessments had been completed.

The procedure for recording staff induction and monitoring staff practice had been improved and induction records were now kept in the office. Records of staff supervision were being recorded, including work based observations to show that staff were competent in their role, carried out the tasks identified in individual care plans and worked in line with policies and procedures.

We were sent a copy of the staff training matrix which showed the training staff had completed. The provider told us that both the paper based and computerised records were now accurate and up to date.

The report from the provider showed that appropriate action had been taken to ensure records were accurate and fit for purpose.

6 July 2012

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We carried out a review of compliance at Acme Care Ltd. on 18 April 2012. During this visit we found that the provider was non-compliant with two of the six outcome areas we looked at.

Following the review of compliance in April 2012 we issued compliance actions for the regulations where we found non- compliance. These were Regulation 9, Care and Welfare, and Regulation 23, Supporting Staff. We asked the provider to send a report to us explaining what they had done to become compliant.

We carried out this review to see what action the provider had taken to improve the areas of non compliance identified during our visit on April 2012.

The provider action plan dated 11 May 2012 told us that all the care and support plans were in the process of being up dated. It also told us that staff training updates and staff supervision had been implemented.

We re-visited the agency on 6 July 2012 to view the improvements the provider had made. We did not talk to people who used the service during this review of compliance. Peoples experience of the service can be found in the report dated 18 April 2012.

We found that the provider had made improvements to the care planning and risk assessment process and was compliant with Regulation 9, Outcome 4 of the essential standards.

We found that the provider had made improvements to staff training and supervision and was compliant with Regulation 23, Outcome 14 of the essential standards.

We did find that the record keeping in the agency was not always accurate, up to date or available to be viewed. We found the provider was not meeting the required standard for Regulation 20, record keeping, and action was needed.

18 April 2012

During a routine inspection

People told us that they were consulted and involved in decisions made about the care they received. People we spoke with told us that staff were polite and treated them with respect. We were told carers were helpful and friendly. One person said 'I couldn't wish for a better agency, my daughter's carer is wonderful'. People told us that the service is very flexible and responsive to people's preferences and choices.

People said that they had regular carers who arrived around the same time each day. One person told us 'My carer arrives about 8.30am and she is usually on time. The office will let me know if she is going to be late'. Relatives we spoke with were happy with the carers'; one person told us 'I am more than satisfied with my wife's carers they understand her and respond to her needs'.

We found that identified risks associated with peoples care could be better managed to make sure people who use the service remain safe and well.

We found that staff were not receiving the training required to carry out their roles and to safely meet the needs of people who use the service.

The agency has a process of canvassing people for their opinions of the service. A satisfaction questionnaire was sent to clients in 2011 and a further questionnaire had been recently sent in 2012. People told us 'I am very happy with the care I receive, it's a brilliant service.' People we spoke with said that they would contact the office if they had any concerns. People were confident their concerns would be listened to and acted on.