KS Care

Updated 17 November 2023

The inspection

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

Inspection team

This inspection was carried out by 2 inspectors and an Expert by Experiences. An Expert by Experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

Service and service type

This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats in the community.

Registered Manager

This provider is required to have a registered manager to oversee the delivery of regulated activities at this location. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Registered managers and providers are legally responsible for how the service is run, for the quality and safety of the care provided and compliance with regulations.

At the time of our inspection there was a registered manager in post.

Notice of inspection

We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection. This was because we needed the provider and registered manager’s support with the inspection process in setting up calls with people and their relatives and the staff team.

Inspection activity started on 17 October 2023 and ended on 31 October 2023. We visited the location’s office/service on 18 October 2023.

What we did before inspection

We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. We sought feedback from the local authority and professionals who work with the service. We used the information the provider sent us in the provider information return (PIR). This is information providers are required to send us annually with key information about their service, what they do well, and improvements they plan to make. We used all this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection

We spoke with 8 people who used the service and 8 relatives about their experience of the care provided to them/ their loved one. We spoke or received e-mail feedback from 23 members of staff including care workers and senior care workers. We also spoke with the registered manager and other members of the management team

We reviewed a range of records. This included 5 people’s care records. We looked at 3 staff files in relation to recruitment and staff supervision. A variety of records relating to the management of the service, including policies and procedures, audits and call time analyses were reviewed.

Updated 17 November 2023

About the service

KS Care is a domiciliary care service providing personal care to people living in their own homes in the community. The service provides support to adults living with a physical disability or a sensory impairment including people who may be living with dementia, mental health needs, a learning disability or may be autistic. Some people were supported on a full-time basis by ‘live-in’ care staff.

At the time of the inspection, the location did not care or support for anyone with a learning disability or an autistic person. However, we assessed the care provision under Right Support, Right Care, Right Culture, as it is registered as a specialist service for this population group.

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. At the time of our inspection there were 69 people receiving personal care at the service.

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

The management team’s governance systems were not always effective in monitoring the service or identifying where improvements could be made. This included areas such as visit times and durations being monitored. People did not always have the right care plans in place, and these were not detailed enough. There were limited overarching audits to monitor the quality of the service. The management team were not informing us of events which happened at the service in line with legislation and statutory guidance. We have made recommendations for the provider to review call monitoring systems and review and update people's care plans.

Despite our findings people were positive about the support from staff. One person said, ‘‘As far as caring staff go this service is the best. They take their time to make sure I am happy.’’

People and relatives told us they/ their family member were safe being supported by staff. There were enough staff to support people with their care visits. People were supported safely with medicines. Staff followed good infection and prevention control (IPC) practices.

Staff had the training and supervisions to be effective in their job roles. People were supported to eat and drink if this support was needed. Staff supported people to see health professionals if they needed this support. 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 told us staff were kind and caring and treated them with compassion. Staff made efforts to get to know people as individuals and support them in line with their preferences. People were supported to make choice about their support. Staff supported people with dignity and respect. People were supported to follow their social interests and pastimes if staff provided this support. The management team responded to complaints and concerns promptly. People were treated with dignity at the end of their life.

The management team were passionate about providing a good service and staff felt well supported in their job roles. People and the staff team were able to give feedback about the service. Staff worked well with other professionals to help people achieve good outcomes. The management team responded immediately to our feedback during the inspection and started implementing improvements.

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 13 June 2018)

Why we inspected

This inspection was prompted by a review of the information we held about this service.

The overall rating for the service has changed from good to requires improvement based on the findings of this inspection.

We have found evidence that the provider needs to make improvements. Please see all the sections of this full report. You can see what action we have asked the provider to take at the end of this full report.

Enforcement and Recommendations

We have identified a breach in relation to the way the service is managed at this inspection.

Please see the action we have told the provider to take at the end of this report.

Follow up

We will meet with the provider following this report being published to discuss how they will make changes to ensure they improve their rating to at least good. We will also request an action plan from the provider to understand what they will do to improve the standards of quality and safety. We will work with the local authority to monitor progress. We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.