You are here

Archived: Carewatch (Harborough) Good

This service was previously registered at a different address - see old profile

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 19 October 2018

This inspection took place on 5 September 2018 and was unannounced.

This was the first comprehensive inspection carried out at Carewatch (Harborough) since they registered with CQC in July 2017.

Carewatch (Harborough) is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats. It provides a service to older adults and younger disabled adults. On the day of our visit, there were four people receiving supported living and 95 people receiving personal care 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.

The registered manager and provider had identified key areas for improvement such as reviews of people’s risk assessments, care plans and staffing. The registered manager was receiving support from the provider to meet the actions required to meet the provider’s requirements for compliance with their policies and standards.

Risk assessments were in place but these were not always reviewed regularly; people received their care as planned to mitigate their known risks.

People did not always receive care from staff they knew. Although staff worked extra shifts and everyone received their planned care, there were unfilled vacancies. The registered manager was actively recruiting staff.

People received care from staff that had received training and support to carry out their roles. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities to safeguard people from the risk of harm.

People were supported to access relevant health and social care professionals. There were systems in place to manage medicines in a safe way.

Staff demonstrated their understanding of the Mental Capacity Act, 2005 (MCA). Staff gained people's consent before providing personal care. People were involved in the planning of their care which was person centred and updated regularly.

People were encouraged to make decisions about how their care was provided and their privacy and dignity were protected and promoted. People had developed positive relationships with staff. Staff had a good understanding of people's needs and preferences.

People were supported to express themselves, their views were acknowledged and acted upon and care and support was delivered in the way that people chose and preferred.

People using the service and their relatives knew how to raise a concern or make a complaint. There was a complaints system in place and people were confident that any complaints would be responded to appropriately.

Inspection areas

Safe

Requires improvement

Updated 19 October 2018

The service was not always safe.

People's risks assessments were not always reviewed regularly.

There were enough staff deployed to meet people�s needs, however, people did not always get regular care staff as there were staff vacancies.

The provider followed safe recruitment procedures.

People received care from staff that knew how to safeguard people from abuse.

Staff followed safe medicines management and infection control procedures.

Effective

Good

Updated 19 October 2018

The service was effective.

People�s care was delivered in line with current legislation, standards and evidence based guidance.

Staff that received the training and support they required to carry out their roles.

People were supported to eat and drink enough to maintain a balanced diet.

People's consent was sought before staff provided care.

Caring

Good

Updated 19 October 2018

The service was caring.

People were treated with kindness and respect by staff.

People were supported to be involved in planning their care.

People's privacy and dignity were maintained and respected.

Responsive

Good

Updated 19 October 2018

The service was responsive.

People received care that met their needs.

People knew how to make complaints and the registered manager followed the complaints procedures.

People could discuss their needs relating to end of life care

Well-led

Good

Updated 19 October 2018

The service was not always well led.

There was a registered manager who understood their roles and responsibilities.

Quality monitoring systems had identified areas for improvement and realistic action plans had been set. Further input from the provider is required to ensure these actions are met.

People were asked for their feedback regularly.