You are here

Archived: True Care

This service is now registered at a different address - see new profile

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 22 November 2011
Date of Publication: 11 January 2012
Inspection Report published 11 January 2012 PDF

The service should have quality checking systems to manage risks and assure the health, welfare and safety of people who receive care (outcome 16)

Not met this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Benefit from safe quality care, treatment and support, due to effective decision making and the management of risks to their health, welfare and safety.

How this check was done

Our judgement

Systems are in place for monitoring the quality of the service. However, these arrangements have not been effective in ensuring that risks are well managed and people benefit from external support when necessary.

Overall we found that improvements were needed for this essential standard.

User experience

We received information about people’s experience of the service and how standards were being monitored. There were concerns for example about missed calls, which resulted in an individual not receiving their care.

The manager said the calls had shown on the system as having been being allocated to a carer; however it did not show on the carer’s time sheet. The manager told us the fault had been reported to the software provider, although to date they could not identify the cause of the error. They added that they had put measures in place to ensure it never happened again. Manual checks had been put in place, a booking list was printed off and each carer had a copy of the time sheet.

The manager described how they had responded in writing to the relative of the individual following the complaint. Both social services and CQC had been informed of the concerns by the manager. The manager reported that all complaints received throughout the year would be included within the annual report, which was sent out to people who used the service.

We received concerns relating to lack of communication between the agency and other healthcare professionals, when people’s needs had changed. A health care professional described how the community team had not been informed of changes to a person’s needs, which could have placed the person at risk. The manager told us care staff were instructed to complete contact forms when they noticed that people’s needs had changed and contact with external agencies would be required. She said staff were trained to recognise any possible potential risks to people. However, she felt that some experienced carers might feel that they could cope with situations themselves, as they had been the main carer for a long time and had a good knowledge of the person’s needs. The manager added that staff needed to be reminded of the importance of informing the office of any changes .

When auditing daily records the manager had identified a situation where the carer had not followed manual handling guidelines. Appropriate action had been taken to address this with the member of staff. The manager confirmed that all staff would be reminded of the importance of completing the contact form when additional intervention was required.

They added that they would ensure all messages and communication was documented.

Other evidence

The manager told us about the arrangements that were in place for assessing and monitoring the quality of the service. These included spot checks on the care staff. These usually took place four times a year unless there were particular concerns when checks would be increased. Spot checks formed part of the staff supervision process.