Archived: Care Support UK Ltd - Leicester

Our inspection of 5 June 2013 found that the service was not operating effective recruitment practices that ensured staff were appropriate to work with vulnerable people and that there were not sufficient numbers of suitably qualified and experienced staff to deliver appropriate care to all people who used the service at the time of our inspection.

Please see our previous reports for further details.

We carried out this inspection to check for improvements. We found that the provider had taken appropriate action to address these failings and was now compliant with the regulations we inspected.

We asked the provider to take immediate action to protect people using the service. The provider kept us informed about the action they were taking to comply with the regulations. We carried out this inspection to check for improvements.

Since our last inspection we found that the provider had made significant improvements. The service had begun to carry out reviews of people's care packages and updated their care records. In addition carers had received appropriate training to enable them to be effective in their roles.

However, the provider had not ensured everybody using the service experienced care and support that met their needs and protected their rights. This was because not all people had had their care needs reviewed and updated to address the failings we found at the last inspection. The provider told us that reviews of all peoples' care would be completed by August 2013.

We did not speak with people using the service as part of this inspection. Please see previous report for details of what people told us about this service.

We looked at the care plans and records for 11 people who used the service and found the service had not taken proper steps to ensure the planning and delivery of care ensured people's safety and welfare and as a result people were exposed to the risk of harm.

The service was not operating effective recruitment practices that ensured staff were appropriate to work with vulnerable people.

There were not sufficient numbers of suitably qualified and experienced staff to deliver appropriate care to all people who used the service at the time of our inspection.

The service had not made suitable arrangements to ensure that staff were supported to deliver care and treatment safely and to an appropriate standard. This was because staff had not received training from a health professional about how to carry out complex care tasks for specific service users.

We spoke with three people who used the service. They told us carers were polite and respectful. One person's relative told us carers were kind and supportive and carried out appropriate care. They said carers 'know what she likes and doesn't like; I can't fault them'.

Records we looked at showed people and their representatives were involved in making decisions about their care and support.

We looked at the care plans and records of six people who used the service and found people's needs were comprehensively assessed. However care plans did not contain sufficient guidance to staff about how people's care should be provided. In addition, moving and handling risk assessments did not properly consider what the potential risks to people were.

We found that staff had been screened as to their suitability to work with vulnerable adults and were aware of the appropriate reporting processes should an allegation of abuse be raised. However, there were not sufficient numbers of suitably qualified and experienced staff to deliver appropriate care to all people who used the service at the time of our inspection.

The provider had an effective quality assurance system.