Archived: Rosywood Care Services

Updated 28 May 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 28 January and 17 February 2015. The provider was given 48 hours’ notice because the location provides a domiciliary care service and we needed to be sure that someone would be in.

The inspection team consisted of two inspectors on each day we visited.

Prior to the inspection we reviewed the provider’s statement of purpose and the notifications we had been sent. A statement of purpose is a document which includes a standard required set of information about a service. Notifications are changes, events or incidents that providers must tell us about.

We also spoke with staff from two local authorities and one CCG (clinical commissioning group). These agencies have contracts with the provider and we asked them for their views on the quality of the service.

We used a variety of methods to inspect the service. We spoke with nine people who used the service and/or their relatives. We also spoke with the provider, registered manager, care co-ordinator, and four care workers.

We looked at records relating to all aspects of the service including care, staffing and quality assurance. We looked in detail at six people’s care records and eight staff files.

Updated 28 May 2015

This inspection took place on 28 January and 17 February 2015. The provider was given 48 hours’ notice because the location provides a domiciliary care service and we needed to be sure that someone would be in.

At our previous inspection of this service, on 15 September 2014, we found five breaches of legal requirements and we issued a warning notice in relation to how people’s care needs were being met. At this inspection we found that action had been taken, improvements made, and the warning notice had been met.

Rosywood Care Services is based in Leicester and provides a domiciliary care service to people living in Leicestershire and Milton Keynes. When we inspected there were 32 people using the service who were mainly older people with physical and mental health needs.

The service has a registered manager. This 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.

At this inspection we found that only a minority of staff had been trained in the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). Some of the staff we spoke with did not understand their responsibilities in this area. The mental capacity assessments we saw were not fit for purpose and did not follow the MCA Code of Practice. This meant that we could not be sure that people’s consent to their care had been lawfully obtained.

We also found that at the time of this inspection the provider owed fees to CQC. However these were paid following this inspection.

People told us they felt safe using the service and staff knew what to do if they had any concerns about people’s welfare. Staff had pre-employment checks to help ensure they were suitable to work with people using the service. Staff cared for people safely and supported them to take their medicines where appropriate.

If people needed support with eating and drinking this was provided. Records showed people were encouraged to choose their meals and staff were aware of their likes and dislikes. If people were at risk of poor nutrition or hydration staff monitored them to ensure they were getting enough to eat and drink.

Staff monitored people’s health and well-being and alerted health care professionals if they had any concerns. They liaised with health care professionals for advice and support as necessary and worked closely with families, where relevant, so that health issues were understood by all those supporting the person using the service.

People told us staff the kind, caring and patient and treated them with dignity and respect. The staff said they built up positive, caring relationships with the people using the service through listening to them and talking with them. Records showed staff continually offered people choices about all aspects of their care and support.

People using the service told us staff were usually on time for their calls. The provider had reorganised their daily schedule of calls to make it more workable. Records showed that since then the timing of calls had improved and excessively late calls were rare. People’s care plans had also been re-written and improved to make them more personalised, meaning they were individual to the people using the service.

People told us that if they had any complaints they would be happy to raise them with staff at the agency. Record showed that if people did complain the agency took prompt action to address their concerns.

Senior staff regularly reviewed people’s care either in person or by telephone. They also checked that staff were doing a good job by observing them providing support. This helped to ensure that people received a good quality service.

We found a breach of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2010 which correspond to a breach of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of this report.