Archived: Engage Care Services - Main Office Also known as Engage Care Services Limited

On this page

• Overview
• Learning culture
• Safe systems, pathways and transitions
• Safeguarding
• Involving people to manage risks
• Safe environments
• Safe and effective staffing
• Infection prevention and control
• Medicines optimisation

Safe – this means we looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm.

At our last assessment we rated this key question inadequate. At this assessment the rating has changed to requires improvement. This meant some aspects of the service were not always safe and there was limited assurance about safety. There was an increased risk that people could be harmed.

The service was in breach of legal regulations in relation to the way topical creams were managed and staff training, with an excessive number of on-line courses being completed in 1 day.

Engage Care Services was only supporting 1 person. Therefore, it was not possible to assess all areas as there was only 1 care plan to review and 1 staff team to speak with. We were unable to compare how the provider may assess wider risks due to only 1 person being supported.

Staff went through the person’s care and support needs with the clinical lead and completed shadow shifts before supporting the person. Staff knew how to raise concerns, although the concerns spreadsheet showed there had been no concerns since July 2024.

The care plan stated equipment had been serviced in May 2024 and was due for the next service in May 2025. However, equipment used for lifting people should be serviced every 6 months.

This service scored 56 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The person told us if they raised an issue with the clinical lead it was resolved.

Staff knew how to report any accidents or incidents.

A spreadsheet had been set up to record any accidents and incidents. Actions taken were noted. We saw no incidents had been reported for the person supported since July 2024.

Engage Care Services – Main Office only supported 1 person. However, we saw incidents reported for previous services provided had been investigated and followed up.

We were told the NHS physiotherapist had trained the staff team in the exercises the person needed to complete every day.

The person said they had to spend time ‘training’ new staff, so they worked as they liked them to.

Staff said they went through the person’s support needs with the clinical lead and completed shadow shifts before starting on the rota.

There had been changes in the staff team as support staff moved from other areas. This was frustrating for the person supported as they had to get to know the new members of staff and they had to get to know them and their routines.

The NHS physiotherapist had provided an exercise sheet for the staff to follow. This was kept in the property.

The person was able to raise any concerns they had themselves if they needed to.

Staff knew how to report any concerns they had.

Staff had completed training in safeguarding vulnerable adults.

The person said the staff team knew their support needs.

Staff said they went through the care plan with the clinical lead and completed training to meet the person’s specific needs before they supported them.

Risks the person may face had been identified and guidance provided to manage these risks.

We were only able to view 1 person’s risk assessments. Therefore, we could not judge if improvements had been made since the last inspection with regard to all risks being identified and person-centred guidance being provided for staff to manage risks, instead of standard statements being used.

The person had no specific feedback on this area.

Staff said they regularly checked the fire alarm was working.

The hoists had been serviced in May 2024 and were planned for another service 1 year later. The Lifting Operations and Lifting Equipment Regulations (LOLER) and associated

Health and Safety Executive’s ‘Thorough examinations and inspections of lifting equipment guidance’ states that any lifting equipment, and any associated accessories, used to lift people needs to have a LOLER examination every 6 months.

We were told the lifting equipment was supplied by the local authority but Engage Care Services – Main Office had not made any attempt to remind them the service was required.

The person said they now had a stable staff team, who knew their support needs.

The registered manager said they were in the process of recruiting staff locally. The UK Visa and Immigration service had revoked Engage Care Services license to recruit staff from overseas. All current members of staff had been employed from overseas on a sponsored visa. This meant there was a risk Engage Care Services would not have staff available to provide support for the person.

Staff said they felt well supported in their role. They had an initial meeting with the provider’s clinical lead to go through and discuss the person’s support needs. They then completed shadow shifts to get to know the person before starting on the rota. Staff said they had regular supervision meetings with the clinical lead for the person they supported.

The training matrix showed staff had completed a range of relevant training. However, staff had completed an excessive number of courses on the same day. For example, 1 staff had completed 14 courses, and another 11, all in 1 day. This meant we were not assured the training was sufficiently robust and staff knowledge checked following completion of these courses.

Spot checks were completed by the clinical lead each month. However, these did not check staff competencies for applying and recording topical creams.

We were told no new staff had been recruited since our last inspection in November 2023. Following that inspection, the recruitment manager told us they had ensured all current staff had suitable references and a full employment history, usually by having an up-to-date CV on file. The recruitment files we saw for the current active staff team contained the required references and employment history. A DBS check had also been completed.

The person said staff completed agreed tasks each day to keep their house clean.

Staff said they had a task list to complete each day to ensure the house was clean and uncluttered. However, team meeting minutes showed a regular issue was not all staff completed these tasks, leaving them for other colleagues to complete on the next shift.

A task list was used to identify what things were to be completed each day, however feedback from staff was that not all staff were completing these.

The person said they administered their own medicines after the staff had passed the blister pack to them. Staff applied moisturising cream. However, they also told us they wanted more support with their medicines as they didn’t want to take the wrong ones.

Staff said they prompted the person when it was time to take their medicines, and they then self-administered them. Staff applied all creams and ointments for the person, but these were not recorded.

A medicines assessment had been completed, which identified the person had the capacity to self-administer their medicines, needed staff support to apply creams and ointments and the person re-ordered their own medicines. There were no creams charts to record staff had applied creams and ointments to confirm this had been completed. The daily records occasionally stated staff had applied creams, but not regularly. This meant there was no record of which topical creams had been applied and at what time. It was not possible to assess if topical creams were applied as prescribed.

We were only able to view 1 person’s support, and they self-medicated their own tablets. Therefore, we could not judge if improvements had been made in managing people’s medicines since the last inspection.