Archived: Opika Care Ltd

Updated 24 September 2016

We undertook an unannounced focussed inspection of Opika Care on 17 and 23 August 2016. This inspection was completed in response to concerns from a police investigation. As a result we undertook a focused inspection to look into those concerns. This report only covers our findings in relation to those topics

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 was completed by two inspectors and an inspection manager. Before the inspection we reviewed the information we held about the service, including statutory notifications that the provider had sent us. A statutory notification is information about important events which the provider is required to send us by law. We also contacted health and social care commissioners who place and monitor the care of some people using the service and the police.

During our inspection we spoke with six members of care staff and the provider.

We looked at documentation relating to the day to day management of the service and staff files.

We were unable to speak to people who used the service because of the on-going police investigation.

Updated 24 September 2016

This unannounced inspection took place on 31 March and 1 April 2015.

Opika Care provides domiciliary care to enable people with a range of care needs to continue living independently in their own home. This small agency predominantly provides services to older people living in Northampton and the surrounding villages. At the time of our inspection the service supported ten people.

At the last inspection in July 2014 we asked the provider to make improvements on care and welfare of people using the services, safeguarding people who use services from abuse, supporting workers, assessing and monitoring the quality of the service and records. These improvements had been completed.

The service had been without a registered manager for seven months. There was a recently appointed manager in post who was completing the registration process to become a registered manager. 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.'

There were robust and effective recruitment processes in place so that people were supported by staff of a suitable character. Staffing numbers were sufficient to meet the needs of the people who used the service and staff received regular training. They were knowledgeable about their roles and responsibilities and had the skills, knowledge and experience required to support people with their care and support needs.

People received a detailed assessment of risk relating to their care and staff understood the measures they needed to take to manage and reduce the risks. People told us they felt safe, and there were clear lines of reporting safeguarding concerns to appropriate agencies and staff were knowledgeable about safeguarding adults.

Care plans were in place detailing how people wished to be supported and people were involved in making decisions about their care. The manager and staff were aware of their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). There were procedures in place to assess people’s ability to make decisions about their care and support.

Medicine management systems were in place and people received the support they needed to take their medicines as prescribed. Staff supported people to attend healthcare appointments and liaised with their GP and other healthcare professionals as required to meet people’s needs. People were supported to eat and drink.

People who used the service and their relatives told us they had no complaints about the service. They knew how to make a complaint and felt the management were approachable. The staff team were seen to be caring and respectful.

Although the provider had improved the quality monitoring systems in place, the recent managerial changes had resulted in a lack of consistency in the completion of some audits. The provider recognised this and had plans in place to further improve this area of practice.