We carried out a review of the data available to us about Creative Care 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 Creative Care Limited, you can give feedback on this service.
Creative care Limited provides care and support to older people and people with a learning disability living in their own homes. At the time of our inspection the service was supporting 28 people.
Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also consider any wider social care provided.
We expect health and social care providers to guarantee people with a learning disability and autistic people respect, equality, dignity, choices and independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ is the guidance CQC follows to make assessments and judgements about services supporting people with a learning disability and autistic people and providers must have regard to it.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
Right Support:
Safe recruitment procedures were consistently followed. Staff received an induction, completed training and shadowed experienced staff before lone working with people.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported his practice.
Staff supported people in a person-centred way. Staff understood people’s communication needs and adapted how they communicated with people to ensure information could be understood.
People and their relatives knew which staff were coming to each support call. We were told staff turned up on time, stayed the allocated amount of time and supported people and their families in a flexible, responsive way.
Right Care:
People were protected from potential abuse by staff who completed safeguarding training and understood the signs and symptoms of abuse and knew how to report any concerns.
Relatives were complimentary about the staff. Staff were described as kind, friendly, supportive, professional, gentle and compassionate.
Right Culture:
Improvements were required to ensure systems and processes to assess and monitor the service were in place and effective. Improvements were required to ensure people and their relatives who contacted the service received a timely response.
Staff felt respected and supported within their roles and were able to raise any concerns they may have. Information was shared with staff to make improvements to the service.
Relatives were kept up to date on any changes, accidents or incidents that may occur. People and relatives were involved in the care planning and support offered.
The registered manager and provider had a clear vision for the direction of the service that demonstrated ambition and a desire for people to achieve the best outcomes possible. The registered manager set a culture that valued reflection, learning and improvement. They were receptive to challenge and welcomed fresh perspectives.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection
The last rating for this service was good (published 13 September 2018).
Why we inspected
We received concerns in relation to staffing and care visit times. As a result, we undertook a focused inspection to review the key questions of safe and well-led only.
For those key questions not inspected, we used the ratings awarded at the last inspection to calculate the overall rating. The overall rating for the service has remained good. This is based on the findings at this inspection.
We found no evidence during this inspection that people were at risk of harm from this concern. Please see the safe section of this full report.
You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Creative Care Limited on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.
This was our first inspection of the service since they registered with us.
Creative Care Limited is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats in the community of Leicester and Northamptonshire. It provides a service to older and younger adults with a range of needs. At the time of our inspection there were 12 people using the service.
Not everyone using Creative Care Limited receives regulated activity; CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with 'personal care'; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also take into account any wider social care provided.
There was 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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
People were kept safe from the risk of harm. People and relatives felt safe with staff. Staff were able to describe how they would keep people protected from potential harm and knew how to report allegations of poor practice.
The provider had effective systems in place to assess and minimise risks to people. Some risk assessments required further detail to ensure specific detail and guidance was available for staff to respond to assessed risks. People were supported to take their medicines safely.
There were enough staff to provide care safely and to support people. Recruitment checks were carried out on staff before they started work to assess their suitability to support people who used care and support services. Records required further development to evidence any potential risks identified during the recruitment process, had been appropriately assessed and acted upon.
Staff received induction, training and support from the management team to ensure they had the necessary skills and knowledge to meet people's needs.
The service was effective in meeting people's needs. People's health and wellbeing was promoted and protected as the service recognised the important of seeking advice from other health and social care professionals. Where required, people were supported to have sufficient amounts to eat and drink.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff assisted them in the least restrictive way possible.
People received a service that was caring. People were cared for and supported by staff who knew them well and supported them to make decisions about how they wanted their care to be provided. Staff were kind, caring and treated people with dignity and respect.
Staff took time to develop relationships with people they were supporting in order to provide care that was personalised. Care plans detailed people's needs, wishes and preferences, although some care plans lacked details of people's life history and background. The registered manager was responsive to people's needs and changing views and wishes. They recognised and responded to people who were at risk of social isolation. People and relatives felt confident to raise concerns and complaints if they needed to and felt these would be listened to and resolved.
People benefitted from a service that was well led. The vision, values and culture of the service were clearly communicated to and understood by staff. A quality assurance system was in place. This meant the quality of the service people received was monitored on a regular basis and, where shortfalls were identified, they were acted upon. There was an open culture where people and staff were encouraged to provide feedback and have an input into the development of the service.