We carried out a review of the data available to us about Everycare Romford 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 Everycare Romford, you can give feedback on this service.
Everycare Romford is a domiciliary care agency registered to provide personal care. At the time of the inspection, nine people were receiving support with personal care.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
At our previous inspection we had concerns with how medicines were managed, whether incidents were recorded appropriately and with the provider’s recruitment processes. At this inspection we found medicines were managed safely, lessons were learned from incidents and accidents and recruitment processes were robust.
At the last inspection we found the provider was not completing quality assurance processes satisfactorily. At this inspection we found a marked improvement with regular quality assurance measures in place in including the gathering of feedback from people, staff and other health and social care professionals.
The service sought to keep people safe from abuse. Risks to people were assessed, recorded and monitored. People told us they were happy with staff punctuality. Infection prevention and control measures were in places.
People’s needs were assessed to ensure the service was effective for them. Staff received inductions, were trained and provided with supervision. People were supported to eat and drink where required. Staff worked with other health and social care professionals to provide people with effective care. 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’s consent was sought when care was provided, and they were given appropriate choices by staff.
People and relatives told us staff were caring. People’s equality and diversity characteristics were respected as was their privacy and dignity. People and relatives were able to express their views about the care provided. People were encouraged to be independent.
People received person centred care, with their needs recorded and reviewed through regular care planning. People’s communication needs were met by staff and their communication needs and preferences recorded in care plans. People were supported with activities they wanted to do. People and relatives were able to complain, and the service responded to complaints appropriately.
Staff and management knew their job roles and responsibilities. Staff were able to engage with the registered manager through regular meetings or supervision. The service worked in partnership with other organisations to benefit people using 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 03 April 2020) and there were breaches of regulation and a recommendation around supervision of staff. The provider completed an action plan after the last inspection to show what they would do and by when to improve. At this inspection we found improvements had been made and the provider was no longer in breach of regulations and had acted on the recommendation.
Why we inspected
This inspection was carried out to follow up on action we told the provider to take at the last inspection.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.
Everycare Romford is a domiciliary care agency that was providing personal care to 13 people at the time of the inspection. The service provides personal care to adults in their own homes. 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. The service supported people with dementia, physical disabilities, older people and younger adults.
People’s experience of using this service
People’s medicines were not managed safely. There were recording issues with medicine administration and medicine administration was not audited for quality or safety purposes. Employees were not recruited in a safe manner. Incidents and accidents were not always recorded. Safeguarding alerts were not completed when they should have been.
Staff were not being supervised regularly, we have made a recommendation about this. Staff did not always share important information with each other.
Quality assurance processes were ineffective or not being completed regularly. Care plan reviews and spot checks were not always being completed. Quality checks did not pick up on issues with care plans, staff files or issues with medicines. The service user guide held incorrect information.
Risks to people were recorded and instructions were provided to staff to mitigate risks. Staff understood infection prevention.
People’s needs were assessed so the service could meet their needs. People were supported to eat and drink well. People were supported with their health care needs.
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. People were able to express their views and stated how they wanted to be cared for. People’s dignity and privacy were respected, and their independence encouraged.
Care plans were instructive, and people told us staff were responsive to their needs. The service assessed people’s communication needs. The service supported people with activities and to avoid social isolation. People knew how to make complaints.
Spot checks and reviews when completed were positive, as were surveys for people’s feedback. The service worked in partnership with others to improve the service they provided to people.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection and update
The last rating for this service was requires improvement (published 02 February 2019) and there was one breach of regulation. The service remains rated requires improvement. This service has been rated requires improvement for the last two consecutive inspections.
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
Enforcement
We have identified breaches in relation to medicines management, recruitment, learning lessons when things go wrong and good governance at this inspection. Full information about CQC’s regulatory response to the more serious concerns found during inspections is added to reports after any representations and appeals have been concluded.
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 work with the local authority to monitor progress. We will return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.
People’s experience of using this service:
There were mixed views on the care provided by Everycare Romford. One person was unimpressed by the service provided and chose to seek care elsewhere. Other people using the service were happier with the care they received and felt the standard of care was good. Everyone thought highly of the registered manager (who has since resigned) and that they provided good support. People and staff informed us that the service was short of staff and this impacted on the care people received and the service provided.
Medicines were not always recorded and managed properly. Lessons were not always learned when things went wrong. We have made a recommendation about monitoring of accidents and incidents. Risks to people were not always recorded or identified. People told us staff were not always on time. Staff were recruited with people’s safety in mind. There were safeguarding processes in place and staff knew what to do if they suspected abuse. Infection control measures were in place.
There were mixed views of staff skills. Staff were not always supervised on time. They told us they received inductions though there was no specific documentation for these. We made a recommendation about recording staff inductions. Staff completed foundation level training in social care. People’s needs were assessed before they started using the service. They were supported to eat and drink. Staff communicated effectively with each other about people’s needs. People were supported to lead healthier lives. We checked whether the service was working within the principles of the MCA and found them to be compliant.
People told us that staff were kind and caring. People were supported to express their views and were involved in decision making about their care. People’s privacy was respected and their independence promoted.
People’s needs and preferences were recorded in detailed care plans and they received personalised care. People completed activities they liked to with staff supporting them. They were able to make complaints and the provider responded to them.
The provider did not complete any audits or spot checks but told us they would begin doing so. We have made a recommendation about quality assurance. The registered manager did not feel supported in their role. They told us they felt they could not complete their responsibilities as they were often required to take on caring responsibilities. There were no meetings held but the provider felt confident they captured people’s, relatives and staff views. No one had completed satisfaction surveys, but the provider was going to send some out to people. The service worked in partnership with others.
Rating at last inspection: This is the service’s first inspection.
Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on our scheduling of regulated services.
Follow up: We identified a breach of regulation relating to safe care and treatment. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report. We have also made recommendations in this report that will be followed up at our next inspection. We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about this service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received, we may inspect sooner.