We carried out a review of the data available to us about Apex Prime Care - Isle of Wight 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 Apex Prime Care - Isle of Wight, you can give feedback on this service.
Apex Prime Care – Isle of Wight is a domiciliary care agency registered to provide personal care for people who require this due to old age, illness or disability. 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 the inspection the agency was providing care for approximately 20 people living on the Isle of Wight.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People told us they received safe care and treatment. Risk assessments were completed for people which identified any risks. Care staff understood the importance of safeguarding people they supported, and they knew how to report any signs of abuse, or any accidents and incidents.
Staff had completed training in the safe administration of medicines. People were happy with how they were supported around their medicines.
Staff received an induction into their role and had received appropriate training that equipped them to support people. They had their competency assessed to help ensure they continued to be sufficiently skilled and knowledgeable. Appropriate recruitment procedures were in place to help ensure only suitable staff were employed.
The management team had processes for monitoring visits and endeavoured to ensure that office staff contacted people when care staff were held up or were running late for visits.
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 and their relatives told us they were happy with the care provided and staff were caring and compassionate. Care staff were skilled in delivering people's care in the way they preferred. They knew people well, which ensured their preferred routines were met.
People were involved with planning and reviewing their care. Care records were written in a sensitive and person centred way.
A complaints procedure was in place, which people confirmed they were aware of. People's concerns and complaints were listened to, addressed in a timely manner and resolved quickly.
Staff, people and relatives told us they had a good relationship with the management team and could seek support and assistance easily when needed. There were effective systems in place to monitor the safety and quality of the service.
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 Requires Improvement (Published 9 October 2018).
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
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.
At the time of the inspection, the service was providing care and support to 35 people. Each person received a variety of care hours, depending on their level of need. The CQC only inspect the services being received by people provided with ‘personal care’; such as help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where this is provided, we also take into account any wider social care provided.
This was the first inspection of the service as it was a new service registered with CQC in September 2017. Inspection activity started on 1 August 2018 and ended 13 August 2018. This inspection was announced. We gave the provider 48 hours’ notice of our inspection as we needed to be sure key members of staff would be available.
There was a registered manager in place. 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.
There were quality assurance systems in place based on a range of audits. However, we found these had not been effective in identified concerns raised during the inspection.
Policies and procedures were in place to dealt with safeguarding concerns. During the inspection, we identified a historic safeguarding incident that had not been raised to the relevant authority by the registered manager. We have made a recommendation in this area.
People did not always feel treated with kindness and compassion. We have made a recommendation in this area. Where people had requested not to receive care from a particular staff member, this was not always dealt with promptly.
People were not always confident that staff would be able to respond to a change in their needs. Staff were not always provided with sufficient information about a new person before they started supporting them.
The service had a complaints procedure in place, however concerns raised were not always dealt with in a robust manner.
People did not always feel the service was well-led. Staff did not always speak positively about the culture and vision of the service and told us that staff morale was low amongst their colleagues.
Individual risks to people had been identified within their care plans, including risks to them and staff in their home environment.
Staff had received training in The Mental Capacity Act 2005 and people’s rights were protected.
People received care from staff who were trained, skilled and knowledgeable to carry out their role effectively.
Appropriate recruitment procedures were in place and pre-employment checks were completed before staff started working with people.
Where people required support with their medication, this was managed safely. Medication administration records were completed fully and accurately.
The service had a system in place to analyse accidents and incidents that occurred, which included identifying patterns and trends. The service had appropriate procedures in place in the event of an emergency.
People had access to suitable healthcare professionals and were supported by staff with eating and drinking where required.
Staff protected people’s privacy and dignity. They encouraged people to remain as independent as possible and involved them in planning the care and support they received.
People’s cultural and diversity needs were explored during their initial assessment and developed over time by senior management.
Although no one was receiving end of life care during the inspection, the registered manager was aware of their responsibilities to ensure that people’s end of life wishes were respected.
The registered manager felt supported by the provider and was invited to regular meetings with other managers of the provider’s locations.
Staff meetings were held for senior management to discuss updates and changes within the service.