You are here

This service was previously registered at a different address - see old profile

Reports


Inspection carried out on 24 May 2018

During a routine inspection

Our inspection of Just Call 4 Care took place on 24 may 2018 and was announced. We gave 48 hours' notice of the inspection was given because the manager may be out of the office undertaking assessments or providing or reviewing care in people's homes. We needed to be sure that they would be available when the inspection took place.

Just Call 4 Care is a domiciliary care agency that provides a range of support to adults living in their own homes. At the time of our inspection, the service provided care and support to 110 people.

The service has a registered manager. 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 who used the service spoke positively about the care that was provided to them. Staff members also spoke with kindness about the people who they supported. People were protected from the risk of abuse. The provider had taken reasonable steps to identify potential areas of concern and prevent abuse from happening. Staff members demonstrated that they understood how to safeguard the people. Safeguarding training and information was provided to staff.

The service had developed personalised assessments of risks to people. These assessments included guidance for care staff on how to manage identified risks and minimise the likelihood of harm. Arrangements were in place to ensure that people's medicines were given safely. Staff members had received training in safe administration of medicines.

Staff recruitment processes were in place to ensure that workers employed by the service were suitable for the work they were undertaking. The provider had checked staff references and criminal records prior to their appointment.

Staffing rotas met the current support needs of people. There was a system for ensuring that care calls were managed and monitored. Staff and people who used the service had access to management support outside of office hours.

Staff members received training and support to ensure that they had the skills and knowledge they required to undertake their roles well. Staff members received regular supervision sessions with a manager. The service was meeting the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act. Information about people's capacity to make decisions was included in their care plans. People were asked for their consent to any care or support that was provided. People are supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff support them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service support this practice.

People told us that staff were caring and respectful. People who used the service and staff members spoke positively about its management. They knew what to do if they had a concern or complaint about their care.

A range of processes were in place to monitor the quality of the service such as regular audits of records and spot checks of care practice. Quality assurance processes were in place and were effective.

Inspection carried out on 15 August 2016

During a routine inspection

This inspection took place on 15 August 2016 and was announced. This was the first inspection of this service at the new office address.

The service provided domiciliary care to 85 people in their own homes. There was a registered manager at this location. 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. The registered manager was aware of their legal responsibilities and had notified the Care Quality Commission of events they were required to do by law.

Medicines were not managed safely. Staff who supported people to take their medication had not always recoded they had done so, and were not sure of the appropriate action to take in the case of missed medication or recording errors.

The provider had not established adequate quality monitoring processes to identify if the service was meeting people’s needs or how it could be improved. Audits had not always identified when errors in record keeping had occurred. Not all information was reviewed for trends to identify learning opportunities to improve the service.

You can see what action we have asked the provider to take at the back of the report.

Staff we spoke with knew how to recognise the signs of abuse. Care plans identified people’s specific conditions and how staff were to support them to keep them well. When necessary the provider involved and worked with other professionals to meet people’s care needs. Staff we spoke with were knowledgeable about how to meet the care needs of the people they supported although records were not always available for them to refer to at the persons home.

People told us they were supported when necessary by staff to eat and drink enough to keep them well. However a lack of appropriate recording and auditing meant that people might come to harm by not having sufficient food and drink.

Staff training and supervision made sure that staff were knowledgeable about their role. Recruitment processes ensured that people were supported by staff who were safe and suitable to meet their needs. The registered manager sought people’s views of the service. Senior staff conducted spot checks and observations of how staff supported people.

People were generally supported by the same staff which had helped them to develop positive relationships. Staff knew how people liked to be supported and told us how important it was for them to meet people’s needs well.

People told us that they were asked to consent to their care and were treated with dignity and respect. However where people lacked capacity to make decisions, the provider had not ensured that the service acted in accordance with the principles of the Mental Capacity Act within the delivery of the service.