The Care Quality Commission

Archived: Medico Nursing and Homecare - Stockport

Part Ground Floor, St Christopher House, 217 Wellington Road South, Stockport, Greater Manchester, SK2 6NG (0161) 480 6078

Provided and run by:
Nestor Primecare Services Limited

All Inspections

27 December 2012

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We completed an unannounced inspection on 27 December 2012 at Medico Nursing and Homecare Stockport, which is part of the Nestor Primecare Services Limited provider group. The visit was carried out to check if improvements had been made following the previous review of compliance conducted in July 2012, in the agency's staff supervision and appraisal systems. We found that improvements had been made.

We spoke with four people who used the service, four staff members and the deputy manager. As part of our inspection, we reviewed the records held in the branch office and their electronic record system.

People who used the service all told us that they were happy with the care and support provided by the staff. They told us they had no complaints about the service and that they were confident the manager would appropriately address any issues they had.

Staff told us that they had seen improvements in how they were supported by the management team and that they now received regular supervision sessions and had had an appraisal. They told us and we saw that learning and development opportunities were made available to staff to appropriately care for and support people who used the service. We saw in the records reviewed that following staff appraisals the staff who had wanted to develop their skills and knowledge were invited to apply to attend appropriate courses to further develop their skills.

24 July 2012

During a themed inspection looking at Domiciliary Care Services

We carried out a themed inspection looking at domiciliary care services. We asked people to tell us what it was like to receive services from this home care agency as part of a targeted inspection programme of domiciliary care agencies with particular regard to how people's dignity was upheld and how they could make choices about their care. The inspection team was led by a CQC inspector and joined by an Expert by Experience who had personal experience of using or caring for someone who used this type of service.

We carried out fifteen telephone interviews with people who use the service and spoke with six people and their relatives within their own homes to gain views about the service. We contacted the local authority that had a contract with the agency, and the local safeguarding adult's team. We also spoke with the manager and seven staff who worked for the agency.

People who used the service told us that Medico - Stockport provided good quality care and offered a reliable service. People spoke positively about their care workers and felt they fully supported their care needs. People also said that their care workers spoke with them in a respectful way.

People we spoke with who used the service said that their care was personalised to their needs and their preferred names were used at all times. One person commented 'The carers announced themselves when they entered my home and asked how I would like to be addressed by them.' All the people spoken with said their care package was reviewed on a regular basis with them and most people said they had completed a questionnaire about the support they had received. People said that they had a choice about the care and support that they received from the agency. People were involved about the way their care was given to them. If any one wished to make a complaint about their support they had numbers that they could ring and names of key people. They said that their views were listened to by the management of the agency.

People who used the service felt that staff were well trained and understood their needs. They said they felt safe and if they had concerns they would speak with a family member, friend or somebody from the office.

Care workers commented that they enjoyed their work and that the support they got from other staff and the management team was good. They also commented "I find my job rewarding and I like making a difference to people", "I love caring and meeting different people", "Its good to help and assist people" and "I enjoy my work and make sure it is right."

An acting manager was currently in place at the agency and staff spoke highly of the new manager and her contribution to the agency.

During a routine inspection

We spoke by telephone to people who used the service, family members and members of staff on the 25 June 2010. We also received information from local authority contracts and compliance departments and social services.

The people we spoke with had received a service between four months and twenty-one years. They all told us that they were satisfied with the service. Comments that were made to us included:- 'can ask them (care workers) to do anything and they will do it'; 'feel that Medico understand my parents needs'; 'respect privacy and dignity'; 'can't find words to praise them enough'; 'fantastic organisation, very pleased'.

People said that they had been visited by a senior care worker who had completed an assessment of their care needs. During the assessment people were asked what they wanted and their choices were recorded on the assessment form. The person who was to use the service or a family member/advocate was asked to sign the assessment record and the care plan to confirm that they agreed to what was to be provided.

A care file was given to each person and was kept at their home. The care file contained the service user guide, specific information about specialist treatments or medication, risk assessments, support plan, medication records where necessary and a log/record sheet for recording visits. We were told by a number of different people that the care files were untidy and the log/record sheets were not readily available. Because of this care workers were writing notes on the reverse side of the sheets or 'bits of paper'. The failure to keep well organised care files could affect the care, support and well being of the person as important information could be missed.

The care workers duties sometimes involved them serving a meal. This usually consisted of heating up a 'ready meal' or preparing a snack such as; a sandwich, something on toast or just a cup of tea.

People told us that they felt safe and had no complaints. They also told us that they knew who to complain to should they feel it necessary. One person had complained in the past and their complaint had been dealt with immediately to their satisfaction. Not everyone we spoke with could remember being asked for their views and opinions. However others told us that they had received a telephone call from a care coordinator or had received a client survey form.

Everyone said that the care workers were clean and tidy and were provided with disposable gloves and aprons to prevent any cross infections.

We were told by the care workers we spoke with that they had all received training in areas such as safe handling of medication, moving and handling and safe guarding adults. All had been through a recruitment and selection process which included a criminal record bureau check, two reference checks and interview.

People who used the service told us that the care workers, usually arrived on time, usually stayed the allocated time, mostly never missed a visit and mainly had the same care worker.

However, other information we received from two local authorities told us that people did not always receive a call/visit. The failure of the care workers to make their calls/visits could have a serious affect on the care and well being of the person, such as important medication not being given.

We were also informed that the branch had not informed social workers when two serious incidents had occurred and that the social workers had been made aware of the situations by others.