We carried out a review of the data available to us about Care Centred Ltd 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 Care Centred Ltd, you can give feedback on this service.
The Kingsgate is a domiciliary care agency providing personal care to five people at the time of inspection.
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.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People were supported to take their medicines safely. However, the recording of this was not always clear. The provider was changing their systems of recording, which had contributed to this. The provider understood improvements were needed, and was in the process of making these changes.
There were systems in place to protect people from abuse. People told us they felt safe and cared for by staff and the service. Accidents and incidents were monitored, and actions taken to reduce the risk of a similar incident reoccurring.
Staff knew people well and treated them with kindness and respect. Staff were suitably trained and had enough time to spend with people when providing care. The provider appropriately assessed people prior to providing care to them. Ongoing assessment and reviews were carried out to support people.
People told us they were happy with the care they received. People had detailed care plans that were personalised and gave staff information on how to care for individual people. The service worked in partnership with people to provide personalised care to them and adapted their approaches in line with the persons wishes and preferences.
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.
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 the service was requires improvement (published 05 September 2019). 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 those regulations.
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection of this service on 5 July 2019. Breaches of legal requirements were found. The provider completed an action plan after the last inspection to show what they would do and by when to improve safe care and treatment and the need for consent
We undertook this focused inspection to check they had followed their action plan and to confirm they now met legal requirements. This report only covers our findings in relation to the Key Questions Safe, Effective and Well-led which contain those requirements.
The ratings from the previous comprehensive inspection for those key questions not looked at on this occasion were used in calculating the overall rating at this inspection. The overall rating for the service has improved to Good. This is based on the findings at this inspection.
You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for The Kingsgate on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.
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.
Maple House is a domiciliary care agency providing personal care to seven people at the time of the inspection.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People did not always receive care in a way that protected them from avoidable harm. This was because risks were not always appropriately assessed and managed, including risks associated with the management of medicines.
People were not supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff did not support them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service did not support this practice. This was because the provider did not always adhere to the correct legal processes to ensure people who did not have the capacity to consent would only receive care that was in their best interests.
There were systems to protect people from the risk of abuse and for the provider to learn from accidents and incidents. People received care in a way that protected them from the risk of infection. There were enough staff to care for people safely, although improvements were needed to the recruitment process to ensure the provider had all the information about their staff that was required by law.
People received care from staff with the appropriate skills and knowledge, who had the support they needed to do their jobs well. The provider assessed people’s needs in line with best practice, working alongside other organisations when appropriate, which helped to ensure people had good outcomes in terms of their healthcare and nutrition.
Staff were caring and respectful, taking time to build up good relationships with people. People were involved in planning their care and had opportunities to make choices about how they were cared for on a daily basis. Staff promoted people’s privacy, dignity and independence.
People told us they were happy with the quality of their care. Although care plans needed more detail to ensure staff were fully aware of how to meet people’s needs and preferences, at the time of the inspection the small staff team meant staff knew people well and were responsive to their needs. Staff knew how to communicate effectively with people. We have made recommendations about considering people’s diverse needs when planning care and about exploring people’s preferences about end of life care.
Although the provider’s governance system required improvement because they had not identified the issues we found, people were happy with how the service was managed. There was a robust complaints policy in place and the registered manager regularly sought feedback about the service from people, their relatives and staff. They monitored staff closely to ensure they provided good quality care.
Rating at last inspection
This service was registered with us on 07/03/2018 and this is the first inspection.
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the date of registration.
Enforcement
We have identified breaches of the regulations in relation to safe care and treatment and the need for consent at this inspection. Please see the action we have told the provider to take at the end of this report.
Follow up
We will request an action plan for the provider to understand what they will do to improve the standards of quality and safety. We will work alongside the provider and 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.