You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Requires improvement

Updated 20 October 2017

This was an announced inspection carried out on the 15 and 17 August 2017. This was the first inspection of the service.

Love In Care is registered to provide personal care to people in their own home.

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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

We found medicines were not managed safely. Records of people’s medications were not clear and it was not therefore possible to be sure people had received their medications as prescribed. This put people’s health at risk.

Risks to people who used the service and staff were not fully assessed and risk management plans in place did not always contain the information staff needed to support people safely and manage all risks identified.

Three people told us they could not always communicate in their preferred language of English with some staff. This mean suitably competent staff were not always provided to meet people’s care and support needs and this had led to errors when providing people’s care. Records did not show staff were provided with appropriate support and training to enable them to carry out their job effectively.

There were no effective systems in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service provided. This had resulted in some areas not being monitored and managed properly. This included records of recruitment, medication and care documentation.

Most people who used the service or their relatives told us they or their family members were provided with safe care. People told us staff were caring. However, one person said they were not satisfied with the service and hadn’t always found staff to be respectful. They also said they did not receive satisfactory support with their meals.

People said they received care from familiar and consistent care workers who were punctual and spent the required amount of time with them. The service worked flexibly to ensure people received support at the times they needed it.

The manager had an understanding of the principles and their responsibilities in accordance with the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005. People told us they were asked to consent to their care. Records indicated people were encouraged to be as independent as possible.

Care plans had information that helped staff get to know the person such as their life history, their preferences and what was important to them. We saw some care plans did not give full guidance to staff on how to meet people’s needs. The manager said they would be reviewing care plans to ensure there were no gaps or omissions.

There were procedures in place for responding to people’s concerns and complaints. The provider had not received any formal complaints in the last 12 months.

We found breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) regulations 2014 with regard to safe care and treatment, staffing and governance. You can see the action we have told the provider to take at the end of this report.

Inspection areas

Safe

Requires improvement

Updated 20 October 2017

The service was not always safe.

People’s medicines were not managed safely.

Risk assessments did not always contain the information staff needed to support people safely.

Suitably competent staff were not always provided to meet people’s care and support needs and staff recruitment procedures were not fully documented.

Effective

Requires improvement

Updated 20 October 2017

The service was not always effective.

Staff were not always provided with appropriate support and training.

The service provided people with support with meals and healthcare when required. However, one person was not satisfied with the support they received with their meals due to staff not being able to read cooking instructions.

People told us they were asked for their consent before care was provided.

Caring

Requires improvement

Updated 20 October 2017

The service was not always caring.

Most people told us they were happy with the standard of care provided.

One person told us they did not feel staff always respected them when providing care.

Records did not show how people who used the service were involved in the development of their care plans.

Responsive

Requires improvement

Updated 20 October 2017

The service was not always responsive.

Gaps in people’s care plans meant staff were not always provided with full guidance on people’s support needs.

There were systems in place to ensure complaints and concerns were responded to appropriately.

Well-led

Requires improvement

Updated 20 October 2017

The service was not always well- led.

Some people who used the service did not feel the service was well managed.

There were no effective systems in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service provided.

The manager was accessible to staff and had frequent contact with them.