Caring Partnership Ltd

Updated 15 August 2018

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

A comprehensive inspection took place on 10 and 12 July 2018 and was announced. We gave the service 24 hours’ notice of the inspection visit because we wanted to make sure the registered manager would be in the office. The inspection team consisted of one adult social care inspector.

We visited the office location to see the registered manager and office staff; and to review records. We spoke with the registered manager, the operations manager and two regional managers, six people who used the service, a relative and five staff members to obtain their views of the service.

We looked at three people’s care plans in detail and a further three care plans for specific information. We inspected six staff members’ recruitment records, and/or supervision, appraisal and training documents. We reviewed documents and records that related to the management of the service.

The provider had not completed a Provider Information Return (PIR) prior to our inspection.

This is information we require providers to send us at least once annually to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

As part of the inspection we reviewed information we held about the service and requested feedback from other stakeholders. These included Healthwatch, the local authority safeguarding team and local authority commissioning and contracts department. Healthwatch is an independent consumer champion that gathers and represents the views of the public about health and social care services in England.

Updated 15 August 2018

A comprehensive inspection took place on 10 and 12 July 2018 and was announced. The service was previously inspected in May 2016, under the name of Hillside, but was the same provider and was rated as ‘Good’ overall.

This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own homes in the community. At the time of this inspection the service was supporting 63 people. Not everyone using the service receives regulated activity; the Care Quality Commission (CQC)only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also take into account any wider social care provided.

There was a registered manager in post at the time of our inspection. 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.

The registered manager told us not everyone who received a service had the capacity to make decisions about their care and support. They said people did not always have mental capacity assessments or best interest decisions in their care plans. The registered manager said some ‘as required’ protocols were not in place and although, MARs and daily log books were audited, actions were not always recorded. The registered manager told us they would be addressing these issues immediately. The operations manager told us they were in the process of looking to introduce a more robust audit system.

People told us they were very happy with the service, felt safe and staff were kind and caring, treated them with dignity and respected their choices. There were procedures in place to protect people from risk of harm and individual risks had been assessed and measures had been identified to reduce the risk. Staff we spoke with understood the signs to look for which may indicate potential abuse. Staff told us they always had sufficient gloves and apron for providing personal care.

Robust recruitment procedures were in place and staffing levels we suitable to meet people’s identified needs. People who used the service said staff always stayed the agreed length of time and were more or less always on time. Staff attended supervision and completed appropriate training.

Individual needs were assessed and care plans identified how care and support should be delivered, people’s routines and preferred preferences. Staff members told us care plans contained sufficient information to enable them to carry out their role effectively. People received assistance with meals and healthcare when required. The service provided support for people who were approaching the end of their life with support from the relevant district nursing team. Staff had received training and there were policies and procedures in place for staff to follow for the safe handling of medicines.

People and staff told us the management of the service was very good. Mechanisms were in place to obtain feedback on the service from people who used the service, family members and staff, including questionnaires, observations of staff practice and meetings. Complaints were appropriately managed.