You are here

Archived: Kalcrest Care Ltd

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

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 12 September 2013
Date of Publication: 1 October 2013
Inspection Report published 01 October 2013 PDF

The service should have quality checking systems to manage risks and assure the health, welfare and safety of people who receive care (outcome 16)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Benefit from safe quality care, treatment and support, due to effective decision making and the management of risks to their health, welfare and safety.

How this check was done

We looked at the personal care or treatment records of people who use the service, carried out a visit on 12 September 2013 and talked with staff.

Our judgement

The provider had an effective system to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people had received.

Reasons for our judgement

At the inspection in April 2013 we had concerns the provider did not have an effective system to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service which people received. For example there were gaps in the medication records and this had not been identified by the systems the service used to assess and monitor the quality of the service they provided. The provider wrote to us and told us they would take action to ensure they were compliant. They told us the actions would be completed by the 1st August 2013. At this inspection we looked at what improvements had been made.

We found the registered manager had reviewed the medication records and had put in place a system which enabled them to identify any issues. The registered manager told us they reviewed approximately 20 records each month and if any issues were identified these would be raised with staff. We looked at five medication records and their audits, we found they had been completed and any issues had been responded to.

The agency had designed and started using daily progress notes and medication records, which staff used in people’s homes and brought into the office each month. This enabled the registered manager and the care co-ordinators to check them and easily identify if people’s needs had not been met.

The registered manager now kept a record of all complaints and concerns which they reviewed each month to look for patterns or trends, such as when staff were late for a visit.

Every six months the staff telephoned people who used the service and asked for their views of the service, and asked if they required any changes to their care. This ensured staff had met the people’s needs appropriately. We looked at four records of the telephone calls and saw people were satisfied with the service they had received.

We did not speak to people at this inspection, however during our inspection in April with people's permission we telephoned five people who used the service and visited two people in their homes so they could tell us their experiences of the agency. All told us the service was “very good” or they were “very happy”, one person said it was “excellent and they could not wish for better carers”. Four people told us the agency had sought their views about the quality of the service provided.