We carried out a review of the data available to us about Caringlinks Limited on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Caringlinks Limited, you can give feedback on this service.
Caringlinks Limited is a domiciliary care agency It provides personal care to people living in their own homes. At the time of our inspection 41 people were using the service, 39 of which received 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
People were protected from the risk of abuse. Staff had received training in how to safeguard people from abuse. Staff understood how to report any concerns they had to relevant professionals.
Medicines were managed safely by trained and competent staff.
People's needs had been individually assessed. Care plans and risk assessments detailed the actions staff should take to minimise any risk of avoidable harm.
People and relatives consistently told us the staff knew them well, people and their relatives, where appropriate, were involved in their care planning and how they wished to be supported.
Staff had built positive relationships with the people they were supporting and demonstrated a good understanding of people's preferences and needs.
The registered manager understood the importance of monitoring the quality performance of the service. There were systems and processes in place which regularly provided this information including continuity of staff, medication and care record audits. This information was monitored and actioned appropriately.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection
The last rating for this service was good (published 01 January 2020)
Why we inspected
We undertook this inspection as part of a random selection of services rated Good and Outstanding to test the reliability of our new monitoring approach.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.
Caringlinks Limited is a domiciliary care service providing personal care for adults within the community and within a local prison. The service currently supports 43 people. 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
People felt safe when receiving care and the staff knew how to protect people if they suspected they were at risk of abuse or harm. Risks had been identified and staff understood how to support people to reduce identified risk without restricting their rights. Recruitment checks were made to confirm staff were of good character to work with people and sufficient staff were available to meet people's support needs.
People had a care plan which reflected their specific needs and preferences. People could make decisions about their care and staff knew how to respond if people no longer had capacity to make some specific decisions. 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.
Staff received training to develop their knowledge to enable them to support people and people felt the staff had the right skills to provide the care they wanted. People generally received their care at a time they wanted it and they knew who would be providing their support. People were happy with how the staff provided care and their privacy and dignity were respected.
People’s health needs were managed, and the staff worked with health care professionals to ensure they understood how to provide their care. Where people required assistance to eat and drink, the staff prepared their food as requested and received further training to understand how to support people who needed a specialist diet.
Care was planned and reviewed with people and they felt comfortable raising any issues or concerns; there were arrangements in place to deal with people's complaints. Quality monitoring systems were in place to review the service provided and to recognise where improvements could be made.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection
The last rating for this service was Good (published 16 May 2017)
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.
The service provides personal care and support to people who live in their homes in and around the Derby area. At the time of this inspection 33 people received support from the agency, all of whom received support with their personal care needs.
The service is required to have 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 felt safe with the support they received from the service. Staff had been trained and understood their responsibilities for safeguarding people.
All the required pre-employment checks had been completed on staff employed at the service. There were sufficient staff deployed to meet people’s needs.
Medicines were managed and administered in line with the provider’s policies and procedures. Risk assessment processes were in place to identify, and where possible, reduce risks. Accidents and incidents were reported and managed in line with the provider’s procedures.
The provider had a policy and procedure in place on the Mental Capacity Act 2005 to follow, should a person not have the capacity to consent to their care. Staff sought people’s consent before they provided care.
Staff had maintained up to date skills and knowledge in areas relevant to people’s care and support, including safeguarding people and assisting people to mobilise safely. Training for more specific areas of care was also in place to support staff competence in these areas.
Staff understood how to support people with their nutrition and hydration needs. Staff provided care and support to help people with their meals and drink in a way that met their known preferences.
Staff felt supported by the registered manager and had regular contact with them.
Staff were aware of people’s healthcare needs and supported people to access other healthcare provision when required.
People were cared for by staff who were caring and considerate. Staff knew the people they supported and where possible, provided regular support to people. Staff promoted people’s dignity and privacy. People were involved in planning and reviewing their care and support.
People knew how to raise any worries or concerns. People received personalised and responsive care and their views and preferences, including their cultural preferences were respected.
The registered manager promoted an open culture where opportunities to develop the service were taken. The registered manager was known by people, their family members and staff; people consistently reported the registered manager was approachable.
Systems and processes to check on the quality and safety of services were operated effectively.