You are here

Reports


Review carried out on 9 September 2021

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about Creative Care Limited on 9 September 2021. 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.

Inspection carried out on 14 August 2018

During a routine inspection

This was an announced, comprehensive inspection that took place on the 14,15 and 16 August 2018. The provider was given 48 hours' notice because the location provides a domiciliary care service and we needed to make sure that someone would be in the office at the time of our visit.

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.