Archived: Care Needs Limited Heaton Chapel

412 Manchester Road, Heaton Chapel, Cheshire, SK4 5BY

Provided and run by:
Care Needs Limited

All Inspections

29 June 2012

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We carried out this review due to minor concerns we had regarding the administration of medication in January 2012.

We visited three people during this visit to look at the medication records and ask people their views of the service.

We were told by everyone that they were pleased with the service they received and the care workers who attended to their needs.

No one had any complaints about their medication and one person told us that in all the time they had received a service their medication had never been forgotten.

After our original concerns new medication record sheets had been put in place and people had attended staff meetings to be informed of the changes. However during this visit in June 2012 we found other concerns regarding the administration of medication.

The poor record keeping by the care workers on the Medication Administration Record (MAR) sheets and care workers not making sure that people had taken their medication put the people who used the service at risk.

19 January 2012

During a routine inspection

Care Needs Limited had been in operation since January 2001 and had three branches located in three different areas of Stockport. The branch located at Cheadle Heath was also the company's head office. The two other branches were located at Marple and at Heaton Chapel. The head office at Cheadle Heath was accessible to people with a disability as was the Marple branch. However the branch at Heaton Chapel was on 1st floor and was therefore not accessible for people with a disability.

The company provided support to people who were referred to them by a Local Authority social services department and also to people who obtained Care Needs services privately. They also operated a 24 hour emergency telephone line that was manned by two care workers.

We visited the Heaton Chapel branch and spoke with both the provider Brenda Westwell who was also the registered manager and the area manager Sarah Henigan.

Everyone received an assessment of their personal care needs which formed the basis of their plan of care. During this assessment people were able to tell the company's assessors what their likes and dislikes were. We were told; 'Someone visited and did an assessment to find out what I needed'; 'It was all done in such a rush and they have been marvellous'; 'They even looked around the house and checked if I needed any equipment.' Another said; 'Someone from the office came out and asked lots of questions before the carers started to visit.'

Other comments we received from people who used the service were; 'we know all the carers, they are all quite different, all regulars with different personalities which is good', 'if there are any issues they are sorted out quickly they are very compliant, we are very impressed', 'we are given a rota of carers so we know who will be coming', 'they are kind, respectful and sympathetic', 'they arrive on time and if they are expecting to be late they let me know', 'I am sure they would set things in motion if I was unwell', 'I have excellent support they do what they should do and ask if I need anything else' and 'the girls are excellent.'

Another person said that the staff stayed the length of time they were supposed to, that she had contact numbers to make a complaint if needed, never felt unsafe and staff were always respectful, never rude.

For those people who had a service provided by Care Needs through Stockport MBC all calls were recorded electronically by care workers logging in and out using the telephone.

There had been two safeguarding adults' investigations over the past twelve months. One resulted in a care worker being dismissed and their name being sent to the Independent Safeguarding Authority (ISA) for possible inclusion on the barred list which prevents people from working in the caring profession. The second was investigated but no action was taken as there was no evidence of any involvement by a care worker.

We spoke with care workers during our visit and asked them if they had received training in safeguarding adults and if they knew what to do if they suspected abuse was taking place. The care workers told us that they had received training through Stockport MBC and were able to tell us what they should do.

We were told by Stockport MBC Contracts and Compliance that they had looked into three compliance notifications all of which had been dealt with and resolved promptly by Care Needs. The compliance notifications were about missed/late calls and miscommunication. However they told us that the department had no major concerns at this stage.

We also contacted East Cheshire Contracts and Compliance department. They told us that they had no concerns about the agency; they normally received very good feedback from the people who used the service. They also said that the care workers were very good in giving feedback to the department about any problems or concerns they may have about the people who used the service.

We have judged Care Needs to be meeting the essential standards we have looked at during this inspection apart from Outcome 9 Management of Medication. We have discussed this with the area manager who said that action would be taken to improve the way in which medication was recorded.

We have made some suggestions for improvements to daily record keeping by the care workers in order that Care Needs maintains compliance in all of the essential standards we looked at.