• Services in your home
  • Homecare service

Archived: Mayfair Homecare - Bedford

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Ground Floor, Salamander House, 2-10 St John's Street, Bedford, Bedfordshire, MK42 0DH (01234) 215832

Provided and run by:
Sevacare (UK) Limited

All Inspections

20 & 21 January 2016

During a routine inspection

The inspection was announced and took place on 20 and 21 January 2016.

Sevacare (Bedford) provides personal care and support to people in their own homes and some people living in an Extra Care Housing Complex. At the time of our inspection 95 people were using the service. The frequency of visits ranged from one visit per day to four visits daily.

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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

At the last inspection on 28 October 2015, we asked the provider to take action and make improvements in how people’s medicines were administered and managed.

The provider submitted an action plan detailing that the improvement would be made by 22 December 2015. At this inspection we found that the action had been completed. People’s Medication Administration Record (MAR) sheets had been fully completed. Where medicines had not been administered the appropriate codes had been used to reflect this.

We found staff had been provided with safeguarding training to protect people from abuse and avoidable harm. There were risk management plans in place to protect and promote people’s safety.

Staffing numbers were suitable and adequate to keep people safe. The service ensured safe recruitment practices were being followed.

Staff received appropriate training to support people with their care needs. People were matched with staff who knew them well and were aware of their needs.

Where the service was responsible people were supported to have adequate amounts of food and drinks. If people’s health condition changed staff took the appropriate action to obtain medical attention.

Staff had established positive and caring relationships with people and treated them with kindness and compassion.

People were able to express their views and to be involved in making decisions in relation to their care and support. Their privacy and dignity were upheld by staff.

People’s care needs had been assessed prior to them receiving care. Where appropriate people and their relatives were involved in the assessment process.

The service had a complaints procedure and people were encouraged to raise complaints.

There was a culture of openness and inclusion at the service and staff were able to make suggestions on the quality of the care provided.

The senior staff team at the service demonstrated positive management and leadership skills.

The service had quality assurance processes in place to monitor the quality of the service provision.

The inspection was announced and took place on 20 and 21 January 2016.

Sevacare (Bedford) provides personal care and support to people in their own homes and some people living in an Extra Care Housing Complex. At the time of our inspection 95 people were using the service. The frequency of visits ranged from one visit per day to four visits daily.

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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

At the last inspection on 28 October 2015, we asked the provider to take action and make improvements in how people’s medicines were administered and managed.

The provider submitted an action plan detailing that the improvement would be made by 22 December 2015. At this inspection we found that the action had been completed. People’s Medication Administration Record (MAR) sheets had been fully completed. Where medicines had not been administered the appropriate codes had been used to reflect this.

We found staff had been provided with safeguarding training to protect people from abuse and avoidable harm. There were risk management plans in place to protect and promote people’s safety.

Staffing numbers were suitable and adequate to keep people safe. The service ensured safe recruitment practices were being followed.

Staff received appropriate training to support people with their care needs. People were matched with staff who knew them well and were aware of their needs.

Where the service was responsible people were supported to have adequate amounts of food and drinks. If people’s health condition changed staff took the appropriate action to obtain medical attention.

Staff had established positive and caring relationships with people and treated them with kindness and compassion.

People were able to express their views and to be involved in making decisions in relation to their care and support. Their privacy and dignity were upheld by staff.

People’s care needs had been assessed prior to them receiving care. Where appropriate people and their relatives were involved in the assessment process.

The service had a complaints procedure and people were encouraged to raise complaints.

There was a culture of openness and inclusion at the service and staff were able to make suggestions on the quality of the care provided.

The senior staff team at the service demonstrated positive management and leadership skills.

The service had quality assurance processes in place to monitor the quality of the service provision.

28 October 2015

During an inspection looking at part of the service

This inspection took place on 28 October 2015 and was unannounced.

At our previous inspection on 3 and 4 June 2015, we found that people were at risk of not receiving their medicines as prescribed. This was because there were inconsistencies in how their medicines were administered and managed. Therefore, people were potentially at risk of harm.

This was a breach of Regulation 12 (2) (g) of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.

We asked the provider to provide us with an action plan to address this and to inform us when this would be completed. After the comprehensive inspection, we undertook this focussed inspection to check that the provider had made improvements and to confirm that they now met legal requirements.

This report only covers our findings in relation to the outstanding breach of regulation. You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for ‘Sevacare Bedford’ on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

Sevacare Bedford provides care and support to people in their own homes.

The service had 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

During this inspection, we found improvements had not been made. There continued to be inconsistencies in how people’s medicines were administered and managed by the service. Therefore, there was a potential risk of harm to people’s safety.

The provider remained in breach of Regulation 12(2) (g) of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.

You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.

28 & 29 May and 3 &4 June 2015

During a routine inspection

The inspection was announced and took place on 28 & 29 May and 3 & 4 June 2015.

Sevacare (Bedford) provides personal care to people in their own homes. At the time of our inspection 79 people were receiving a personal care service.

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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

There were inconsistencies in the way medication records were maintained. As a result this placed people at risk of not receiving their medicines as prescribed. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.

Staff had been provided with safeguarding training to protect people from abuse and avoidable harm.

There were risk management plans in place to protect and promote people’s safety.

Staffing numbers were suitable and adequate to keep people safe.

The service ensured safe recruitment practices were being followed.

Staff received appropriate training to support people with their care needs. Where possible people were matched with staff from the same ethnic background.

People were supported by staff to access food and drink of their choice. If required staff supported people to access healthcare services.

Staff treated people with kindness and compassion and had established positive and caring relationships with them.

People were able to express their views and to be involved in making decisions in relation to their care and support.

Staff ensured people’s privacy and dignity were promoted.

People received care that was appropriate to meet their assessed needs.

The service had a complaints procedure and people were encouraged to raise complaints.

There was a culture of openness and inclusion at the service.

The senior staff team at the service demonstrated positive management and leadership skills.

The service had quality assurance processes in place to monitor the quality of the service provision.

6 November 2013

During an inspection in response to concerns

Prior to this inspection the Care Quality Commission (CQC) had received information of concern about the systems in place for both the management and recording of medicines. Although we had no information to suggest that harm had been caused to people, we were aware that there had previously been some safeguarding referrals made to the local authority. It was therefore suggested that the services medication recording system could pose a risk of harm to people.

We found that previous medication errors had been investigated and resolved promptly. It was therefore evident that the provider had listened to feedback and worked to drive improvement and moved forward with the systems and processes in place. We were therefore assured that the provider had suitable arrangements in place to record, safely administer medicines and identify any errors quickly.

5 September 2013

During a routine inspection

We visited Sevacare on 5 September 2013 and looked at the care records for eighteen of the 91 people who used the service. We found records detailed relevant information to inform care delivery and were individual and contained information about people's choices and preferences. Records demonstrated the individual's agreement to the delivery of care.

People told us they were generally satisfied with how Sevacare delivered their care and support. We spoke with fourteen people who used the service and observed written information from a further eight. One person told us "I have had some complaints ' mainly in relation to missed calls." Another person said "Things eventually get done although carers are not always on time." Most of the people we spoke with were satisfied with the care they received.

Staff demonstrated an awareness of safeguarding processes and we saw that safeguarding concerns were followed up. We found staff had received training on safeguarding vulnerable adults and had access to appropriate policies and procedures.

We saw that adequate recruitment checks were made and induction training had taken place. Most of the staff told us they felt well supported.

There were systems in place to monitor and assess the quality of the service. People were asked their opinion of the service and we saw the results of the survey and noted most people were satisfied. There was a complaints procedure and we found complaints were followed up appropriately.

14 March 2013

During an inspection looking at part of the service

Our inspection of 23 November 2012 identified that there was a lack of consistent staff, especially during weekends and that people using the service were experiencing problems with staff time keeping. In addition to this we found that the processes for assessing and monitoring the quality of the service were not adequate and had not identified shortfalls and dissatisfaction with the service.

The provider wrote to us on 21 December 2012 and told us they would improve the assessment process to include people's preferred times for calls. They told us they would ensure that week end calls were adhered to and had started recruiting staff specifically for weekends to help continuity of care. In addition we were informed that improvements would be made to the handling and recording of complaints.

We completed a follow up visit to SEVA Care (Bedford) on 14 March 2013 to review improvements to the service. We did not talk to people who used the service during this visit. We found that improvements had been made to the assessment process to include people's preferences in relation to times of calls and gender of carers.

Systems for the handling of complaints demonstrated that all complaints received in 2013 had been responded to appropriately and in line with the organsiations complaints policy.

23 November 2012

During a routine inspection

During our visit on 23 November 2012, we spoke with five people currently using the service. Everyone we talked with reported problems with time keeping. They told us that these problems mostly related to staff arriving late, but sometimes early as well.

People said that they didn't often have regular staff and this was a particular problem at weekends. Three staff we spoke with said they mostly visited the same people during the week, however at weekends they were often asked to visit people they did not know.

We were told that individual care workers were very kind, provided a good level of care and were always willing to help. All the people we spoke with said staff were polite, respectful and treated them with dignity. One person said, 'My regular staff know exactly how I like things to be done.'

Care plans showed that people or/and their representatives were involved in contributing to the care plans and this was confirmed in discussions we had with people using the service.

There were inconsistencies in the way information was recorded and handled meaning that people using the service cannot be sure that their comments and complaints will be dealt with effectively.