CQC takes action to protect people at Southport care agency

Published: 17 January 2024 Page last updated: 17 January 2024
Categories
Media

The Care Quality Commission (CQC) has rated Assured Care Southport inadequate and placed it in special measures to protect people from harm, following an inspection in October and November.

Assured Care Southport is a domiciliary care agency providing personal care to people living in their own homes. At the time of the inspection the service was supporting 180 people.

This inspection was prompted by a review of the information CQC held about the service.

Following this inspection, the overall rating for the care agency has dropped from good to inadequate, as have the ratings for being safe, responsive and well-led. The rating for how caring the service is has declined from good to requires improvement. Being effective has dropped from requires improvement to inadequate.

The service is now in special measures, which means it will be kept under close review by CQC to keep people safe and it will be monitored to check sufficient improvements have been made. CQC has also taken additional enforcement action, which will be reported on when legally able to do so.

Karen Knapton, deputy director of operations in the north said:

“When we inspected Assured Care Southport, we found widespread and significant shortfalls in leadership, and the culture they’d created didn’t assure the delivery of high-quality care. It was concerning the provider didn’t have a clear understanding of their role and responsibilities to keep people safe.

“Also, they weren’t aware of issues in the service until we informed them. This meant people were at risk and opportunities to improve safety and quality had been missed.

“It was worrying that systems in place to manage accidents and incidents were inadequate. Records didn’t show lessons had been learnt or included what action had been taken to reduce the risk of harm. For example, there was no falls management plan or risk assessment in place to support staff on how to reduce the risk for two people who had experienced multiple falls. This could put them at risk of further falls and harm.

“We found multiple gaps in several people's medication records, which meant we weren’t assured people were receiving their medicines as prescribed. Also, some staff were administering medicines without any competency checks, so we weren’t assured they had the skills to do it safely.

“Additionally, people's care plans didn’t always include people's choices, likes and dislikes or include information so staff knew how to support people with their own individual communication needs. For example, a person's care plan stated they had a hearing impairment but there was no additional information to inform staff the best way to communicate with them.

“We have taken enforcement action against the provider to focus their attention on the areas where we want to see significant improvements. In the meantime, we will continue to monitor the service closely to ensure people are safe while improvements are being made. We won’t hesitate to take further action if we’re not assured people are receiving safe and dignified care.”

Inspectors found:

  • The provider failed to ensure the required recruitment checks were carried out on staff which significantly increased the risk of unsuitable staff caring for people
  • Safeguarding systems were in place, however, not all staff had received safeguarding training in line with best practice guidance and we were not assured staff had the necessary skills and knowledge to protect people from the risk of abuse
  • People were placed at increased risk of harm as staff had not received the required training to meet their needs safely and effectively
  • Relevant training was not provided to ensure staff had the required skills to support people with a learning disability and autistic people in line with right support, right care, right culture guidance
  • People were not supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff did not support them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service did not support this practice
  • The provider failed to ensure care and treatment was planned for people in a personalised way. People's care plans and risk assessments were not always completed, up to date and reflective of their current needs
  • Inadequate governance and quality assurance measures meant people were exposed to unnecessary risk and avoidable harm.

However:

  • Most people and their relatives told CQC they received support from a consistent staff team who generally arrived at their care calls on time
  • People told CQC staff mostly wore PPE and followed good hygiene practices to reduce the risk of infection spread.

The report will be published on CQC’s website in the next few days.

About the Care Quality Commission

The Care Quality Commission (CQC) is the independent regulator of health and social care in England.

We make sure health and social care services provide people with safe, effective, compassionate, high-quality care and we encourage care services to improve.

We monitor, inspect and regulate services to make sure they meet fundamental standards of quality and safety and we publish what we find to help people choose care.