23 October 2014
During an inspection looking at part of the service
The inspection took place on 23 and 28 October 2014 and was announced. We last inspected Philip Parkinson Homecare Limited on 24 July 2014. At that inspection we had identified a breach of regulations in relation to arrangements for managing people’s medicines. We issued a warning notice to the provider and registered manager informing them that they were not meeting the requirements of the law. During this inspection we found sufficient improvements had been made to meet the regulations.
Philip Parkinson Homecare Limited is based in Newcastle upon Tyne and provides personal care to people in their own homes in the Northumberland area. At the time of our inspection 18 people were using the service, most of whom were older people. The service also provided shorter term care and support to people at the end of their lives.
The service had a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
The arrangements for managing medicines had been improved since our last inspection. Staff had undertaken further training and had their competency in handling medicines assessed. Medicines administered by staff were now appropriately recorded and signed to confirm they had been given to people.
We found that people were provided with a caring and responsive service that met their needs. People were happy with their care and support and had formed good relationships with their care workers. One person said, “The carers have been coming for a few months now. They’ve all been great and they do whatever I ask.” Another person said, “We get along very well. The girls are lovely and such a good help.” Relatives felt assured their family members received reliable care that was delivered safely. One relative told us, “It provides comfort knowing someone’s going in to see her.”
People directed and agreed to how their care was provided and, wherever possible, their preferences were accommodated. The service worked with families and other professionals when people did not have capacity to make important decisions about their care.
Although people were given individualised care, their care records were not fully accurate, personalised and kept up to date. Care plans often lacked information about managing risks to the person’s welfare and how to meet their individual needs. This meant the personal records for people using the service did not protect them against the risks of receiving unsafe or inappropriate care. This was a breach of Regulation 20 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2010. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.
New staff were checked and vetted before they started working with people. There were enough staff to provide continuity of care and people told us they usually had the same care workers.
The staff understood how to protect people from abuse and to report any concerns if they believed anyone was being harmed. There had been no safeguarding concerns raised about the service or any reports that staff had put people at risk of neglect by missing their visits.
People were cared for by staff who were supervised and supported in their roles. Staff were given training that enabled them to meet people’s care needs and support them with their health and well-being. The service was well-managed and there were regular checks on staff performance and the quality of the care that people received.