Archived: Carebank Ltd

Updated 14 December 2015

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This inspection took place on 24 and 30 September 2015. The provider was given 24 hours’ notice because as the service was a domiciliary care agency we needed to be sure that they would be available on the day of the inspection.

The inspection team was made up of one inspector and an expert by experience. An expert by experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

Before the inspection, we reviewed the information available to us about the agency such as information from the local authority, information received about the service and notifications. A notification is information about important events which the provider is required to send us by law.

During our inspection we spoke with three care workers, two care coordinators and the manager.

We reviewed the care records, risk assessments and daily records of five people who used the service. We reviewed how complaints were managed, looked at four staff records and the training records for all the staff employed at the service. We reviewed information on how the quality of the service was monitored and managed.

Following our visit to the service’s office we spoke with seven people who used the service and a relative of one person by telephone to ask for their views of the service.

Updated 14 December 2015

This inspection took place on 24 and 30 September 2015 and it was announced.

At our previous inspection in April 2014 there were three areas where the service was not meeting regulations. These related to the management of peoples medicines, the supervision of care workers and the providers quality assurance systems.  At this inspection we found that improvements had been made in these areas.

Carebank Ltd is a care agency providing personal care and support for people in their own homes.  At the time of our inspection the agency was providing a service to 30 people.

The agency does not have a registered manager as required by the Care Quality Commission (CQC). A registered manager is a person who has registered with the CQC 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. At the time of this inspection the agency had been without a registered manager for 12 months. There was, however, a manager at the agency.

People told us that they felt safe and were supported by consistent carers who were knowledgeable and skilled.

People’s needs had been assessed and care plans took account of their individual needs , preferences and choices. There were risk assessments in place that gave guidance to staff on how individual risks to people could be minimised.   There were systems in place to safeguard people from the risk of possible harm.

Staff had an understanding of safeguarding processes and had completed training.  Staff were supported by way of spot checks, supervisions and appraisals however these were not consistently completed for all staff.

The provider had effective recruitment processes in place and was actively recruiting additional staff to support people safely. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities to seek people’s consent prior to care being provided and were kind and respectful.

The provider had an effective process for handling complaints and concerns. These were recorded, investigated, responded to and actions to prevent recurrence were recorded.

The provider encouraged feedback on the service provided. An action plan had been developed to address the issues raised with a view to continuously seeking to improve the service.

The provider had effective quality monitoring processes in place.