• Services in your home
  • Homecare service

Archived: Cestrian Care

Overall: Inadequate read more about inspection ratings

Unit 2 Chester West Business Park, Minerva Avenue, Chester, Cheshire, CH1 4QL (01244) 389302

Provided and run by:
Mrs Kimberley Ellen Dupree

All Inspections

25 January 2016

During a routine inspection

We started an unannounced inspection on the 25 January 2016 and visited the premises at The Enterprise Centre, 14 Parade, and Chester. CH1 5NH. As part of the inspection we spoke to people who used the service and staff on 28 and 29 January 2016. We returned announced on the 9 February to provide feedback and gather some additional information.

Cestrian Care is a domiciliary care agency which provides support and personal care to people in their own homes. The agency is based in Chester and provides support and care within the surrounding areas and Ellesmere Port. Cestrian Care is registered to provide a service from both 68 Norris Road, Blacon. Chester. Cheshire CH1 5DZ and Unit 2 Chester West Business Park, Minerva Avenue, Chester. CH1 4QL.

They currently provide and manage their service from The Enterprise Centre, 14 Parade, and Chester. CH1 5NH but this location is not yet registered with the CQC.

This is the location that we visited for the purpose of our inspection.

We carried out an unannounced comprehensive inspection of this service on 16 July 2015 and found breaches of legal requirements. The overall rating for this provider was ‘Inadequate’. This meant that it was placed into ‘Special measures’ by CQC. Services placed in special measures are inspected again within six months and the service kept under review.

The purpose of this inspection was to check if the registered provider now met legal requirements and to ensure that people who receive the service are provided with safe and effective care. However, we found that the registered provider was still not meeting legal requirements and we identified a number of ongoing breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) 2014. This inspection found that there was not enough improvement to take the registered provider out of special measures. CQC is now considering the action to be taken.

People who used the service had mixed views about the care that they received. Some people said that the staff were polite and caring towards them. They told us staff were quite reliable and that there had been only a few occasions when staff had arrived late. Other people said that the staff did not treat them with dignity and respect and that they felt rushed.

An assessment of people’s needs had been carried out by the registered provider prior to people using the service but these were not kept up to date following any changes in people’s physical or mental health needs. The current systems in place failed to demonstrate how a person needed their care delivering. This put people at risk from not receiving the care and support they required.

People’s medicines were not managed appropriately and they were at risk from not receiving their medicines when they should.

The processes that the registered provider had in place for recruiting staff were unsafe because they did not ensure that staff were suitably skilled, had the right experience or were of good character.

Training provided to staff was inconsistent and it was delivered by someone who did not have up to date knowledge and was not qualified to provide such training. Staff supervisions were not regularly carried out, therefore, staff had not all been assessed as being confident and competent to carry out their role.

Not everyone felt able to complain or have the confidence that concerns would be addressed. Informal complaints were not logged. People’s views of the service were not always sought or formally recorded and no action was taken when issues were raised.

The Care Quality Commission (CQC) is required by law to monitor the operation of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005) and to report on what we find. Staff gained consent from people prior to providing care or services, however where people lacked capacity we saw that arrangements were not in place for staff to act in the person’s best interests. Staff lacked knowledge about the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005).

Quality assurance checks on care plans and care delivery were ineffective because they failed to identify areas for improvement. For example, the registered provider and manager had failed to identify and address areas that required improvement in relation to medicines management, staff recruitment, records and risks to people.

The overall rating for this service is ‘Inadequate’ and the service remains in ‘Special measures’.

Services in special measures will be kept under review and, if we have not taken immediate action to propose to cancel the provider’s registration of the service, will be inspected again within six months.

The expectation is that providers found to have been providing inadequate care should have made significant improvements within this timeframe. If not enough improvement is made within this timeframe so that there is still a rating of inadequate for any key question or overall, we will take action in line with our enforcement procedures to begin the process of preventing the provider from operating this service. This will lead to cancelling their registration or to varying the terms of their registration within six months if they do not improve. This service will continue to be kept under review and, if needed, could be escalated to urgent enforcement action. Where necessary, another inspection will be conducted within a further six months, and if there is not enough improvement so there is still a rating of inadequate for any key question or overall, we will take action to prevent the provider from operating this service. This will lead to cancelling their registration or to varying the terms of their registration.

16, 21 and 23 July 2015.

During a routine inspection

We carried out an unannounced inspection of Cestrian Care on the 16 July 2015. On the 21 July 2015 we visited people in their own homes and on the 23 July 2015 we visited the location with one hour’s notice to complete the inspection and to speak with staff.

In September 2013, the provider registered with us to provide a domiciliary care service. The service was located at Norris Road, Blacon. In November 2014 the service moved to its current location at Chester West Business Park. However the provider did not inform the Care Quality Commission (CQC) about the changes and did not follow the correct registration procedures. Therefore, the service was not registered with us until 26 June 2015. This is the first inspection of the service at its location.

Cestrian Care is a domiciliary care agency which provides support and personal care to people in their own homes. The agency is based in Chester and provides support and care within the surrounding areas and Ellesmere Port. However, the website that Cestrian Care uses to promote their business states that they provide “skilled nursing care”. This service is not registered to provide the regulated activity of ‘nursing care’ in people’s homes.

At the time of the inspection the registered provider told us that they provided care to between 26 and 28 people.

People who used the service told us that they were satisfied with the care that they received. They said that the care staff were polite and caring towards them and that they felt safe during the time they received a service. They told us staff quite were reliable and there were not many occasions where they were late or did not turn up. Family members had no concerns about their relative’s safety or the way their relative was treated.

An assessment of people’s needs had been carried out by the registered provider prior to people using the service and people told us they had been involved in formulating their care plans.

However, we found that the registered provider was not meeting legal requirements and we identified a number of breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) 2014.

The processes that the registered provider had in place for recruiting staff were not safe or robust. This meant that they did not ensure that staff were suitably skilled, had the right experience or were of the character to keep people safe.

Training provided to staff was inconsistent and supervisions were not regularly carried out, therefore, staff had not all been assessed as being confident and competent to carry out their role.

People’s complaints were not identified as such and addressed. This meant people were not listened to, and action was not taken to prevent any unsafe or inappropriate care that was being reported. People’s views of the service were not always formally recorded and we found no action was taken when issues were raised.

The Care Quality Commission (CQC) is required by law to monitor the operation of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005) and to report on what we find. Staff gained consent from people prior to providing care or services, however where people lacked capacity we saw that arrangements were not in place for staff to act in their best interests. Staff were not knowledgeable about the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005). The policies and procedures in place to guide staff in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 were out of date and the advice to staff did not concur with the law.

Quality assurance checks on care plans and care delivery were ineffective and there were no records to demonstrate if care plans were up to date and had been reviewed.

Records were not always provided to us in full when we requested them, which undermined our confidence in the transparency and management of the service. Due to the many concerns that we found, we did not have confidence that the registered provider had oversight of quality and risk.

The overall rating for this provider is ‘Inadequate’. This means that it has been placed into ‘Special measures’ by CQC. The purpose of special measures is to:

• Ensure that providers found to be providing inadequate care significantly improve.

• Provide a framework within which we use our enforcement powers in response to inadequate care and work with, or signpost to, other organisations in the system to ensure improvements are made.

Services placed in special measures will be inspected again within six months. The service will be kept under review and if needed could be escalated to urgent enforcement action