Archived: Czajka Community Care Services Ltd Kirklees

We carried out the inspection with our five questions in mind; Is the service caring? Is the service responsive? Is the service safe? Is the service effective? Is the service well led?

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary is based on our observations during the inspection, speaking with people using the service, their relatives, the staff supporting them and from looking at records.

Is the service safe?

There were enough staff employed at the service to support people who used the service. People's home environments were assessed before they started to use the service to check they were safe and secure. People we spoke with told us they felt safe when care workers visited them in their homes. This showed us the service people received was safe.

Is the service effective?

All of the people we spoke with told us they were very happy with the care provided by the service and their care and support needs were being met.

We found staff were suitably qualified and had the skills, knowledge and experience needed to meet peoples' needs.

From speaking with staff, people who used the service and relatives we found staff were aware of peoples care and support needs.

Is the service caring?

People who used the service and their relatives told us they were supported by kind and caring staff; they all said they would recommend the service to others. They told us 'I've not had any issues. It's been fine.' 'I'm highly satisfied, I couldn't do without them.' They've done such a good job getting me back on my feet. I can't speak highly enough of them.'

Care workers we spoke with told us they felt people who used the service received good care and they were happy with the support they received. 'We all go the extra mile for people we care for.' 'They make going to work worth it.' 'We spend a lot of time with people and getting to know them is just part of what we do. It's a real pleasure.'

Is the service responsive?

Care records showed people's preferences, interests and diverse needs were taken into consideration and care and support was provided in accordance with peoples' wishes.

Is the service well-led?

The service is well led. The registered manager had taken a number of steps to address the concerns raised at the last inspection and put measures in place to improve the service. We saw major improvements to the quality assurance system. Records we looked at showed that all of the shortfalls identified had been addressed.

We found there was evidence to show the service had good leadership and governance in place. For example the provider had an effective system to assess and monitor the quality of service people received. This meant people who used the service were protected against the risks of inappropriate or unsafe care.

When we visited this service on 30 August 2013 we found care and treatment was not delivered in a way that ensured people's safety and welfare; people who used the service were not protected from the risk of abuse; staff did not receive appropriate professional development and the quality of service was not regularly assessed and monitored. We asked the provider to make improvements. We went back on this visit to see whether improvements had been made.

We found some improvements had been put in place, for example staff received appropriate professional development. However there will still issues in other areas.

During our visit, we spoke with the registered manager, the area manager, two care coordinators, 11 people who used the service, three relatives and six care workers.

Feedback from people who used the service and their relatives was mixed. Some people told us they were very happy with the service but others had concerns about the care provided and felt there were still improvements needed.

People's main concerns were about care workers not arriving at the agreed visit time not always staying for the agreed length of time and/or not turning up at all. One person told us, 'Nobody turned up last night and they didn't let me know.'

People and their relatives also told us they felt care staff were 'rushed.' One relative said, 'If they're rushing that means they may not be doing things properly' another said, 'They seem to be looking for shortcuts; after they've left I've found the freezer door left open, taps left dripping and curtains left drawn.'

When we asked people and their relatives about the staff working at the service most people told us the care staff were kind, caring and conscientious and treated them with dignity and respect. One person told us, 'They're very nice; all of them,' another said, 'The staff are very good. I have no complaints' and another said, 'There are some nice staff really; they just aren't the best.' One relative said, 'I feel the staff are slightly overworked. I think they're doing as good a job as they can under the circumstances.'

During our inspection we looked at nine care records of people who used the service. We found care and treatment was not always delivered in a way that ensured people's safety and welfare.

We found evidence which showed accidents and incidents at the service were not being followed up appropriately; this meant people's care needs were not always being met.

The service was also not notifying incidents appropriately to the Care Quality Commission and the Local Authority Safeguarding Team. Following our visit we made a whole service safeguarding referral to the safeguarding team. This was because we had concerns that incidents of neglect and abuse at the service were not being reported. This meant that someone external to the service would look at the issues we had raised.

We also noted accurate and appropriate records were not being maintained and some people's care records were not up to date and fit for purpose.