You are here

Caring Hands Requires improvement

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating

Requires improvement

Updated 26 February 2020

About the service

Caring Hands is a domiciliary care agency (DCA) providing personal care to older people and people with physical disabilities in their own homes. At the time of this inspection 27 people were supported with personal care. 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.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

Improvements had been made to the audits carried out by the registered manager; however, they did not always record how safety and quality was monitored. The provider's systems had not identified issues we found on inspection with records. Care records relating to people’s health did not always reflect the care being delivered. Improvements were required to ensure the information contained within people's care records was personalised, consistent and accurately reflected peoples current care and support needs. Staff were knowledgeable about people's needs and people's safety had not been impacted.

People could not be assured their personal information was being shared securely. Staff communicated information between themselves in real time through an electronic application on their personal mobile phones. The provider had not ensured this process was secure or considered people’s rights to confidentiality and data protection. The registered manager took immediate action to stop this practice at the time of the inspection.

Improvements were needed to ensure people were involved in all aspects of their care and were supported to express their views.

People said they felt safe and were protected from harm. A person said, "I feel very safe. They are very good at making sure you feel cared for. They are very helpful.” Staff had a good understanding of what safeguarding meant and the procedures for reporting any issues of harm to people. All the staff we spoke with were confident any concerns they raised would be followed up appropriately by the registered manager.

There were enough staff to care for people safely, with staff and people using the service telling us current staffing arrangements were sufficient. Staff said their rotas were well managed, with sufficient travel time between each care visit. A relative said, "They (staff) are always near to being on time, give a few minutes here or there. Very good at providing the same staff which is handy. It means we get to know them.” The staff recruitment procedures ensured appropriate pre-employment checks were completed to ensure only suitable staff worked at the service.

Medicines were managed safely by trained staff. Effective practices were in place to protect people from infection. Staff received supervision and appraisals to support them in their role and identify any learning needs and opportunities for professional development. A person said, “They (staff) are skilled. I feel comfortable with what they know. If there is any doubt they always ask the questions. They do, without sounding over the top, but they know what is expected and they know how to do it.”

Senior staff carried out spot checks to monitor the quality of the service provided and to seek the views of the people who were supported. A person said, “I am very happy with the service, it is difficult not to overstate the situation, whatever they do for me is very good.” People had a choice of meals and told us they had plenty to eat and drink.

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 this practice.

People received appropriate healthcare support as and when needed and staff knew what to do to request assistance. Complaints were investigated and managed appropriately in line with the provider's policy.

Inspection areas



Updated 26 February 2020

The service was safe.

Details are in our safe findings below.



Updated 26 February 2020

The service was effective.

Details are in our effective findings below.


Requires improvement

Updated 26 February 2020

The service was not always caring.

Details are in our caring findings below.



Updated 26 February 2020

The service was responsive.

Details are in our responsive findings below.


Requires improvement

Updated 26 February 2020

The service was not always well-led.

Details are in our well-Led findings below.