The Care Quality Commission

Archived: Allied Healthcare Shefford

4 North Bridge Street, Shefford, Bedfordshire, SG17 5DH (01462) 816612

Provided and run by:
Nestor Primecare Services Limited

All Inspections

20 June 2013

During a routine inspection

We visited NPSL trading as Allied Healthcare Shefford on 20 June 2013 to review improvements made within the service following compliance actions issued at the previous inspection in October 2012. We found a new management team in place and a number of staff changes had occurred.

During this inspection we found a very different service, which was organised and appropriately staffed. We spoke with three relatives and eight people currently using the service. In addition we spoke with six staff. People told us they were happy with the care and support they received. People we spoke with felt that their personal care was carried out in a manner that promoted their privacy and dignity.

We observed variable information in the care files and we were informed that the service was in the process of reviewing and improving people's care plans.

All people we spoke with said that they felt safe having care staff in their homes. One person said "The staff are really nice and they listen to me."

We saw that staff were receiving appropriate training, professional development, supervision and appraisals.

The service was notifying the Care Quality Commission of important events thatmay have affected the welfare, health and safety of people receiving the service.

14 February 2013

During an inspection looking at part of the service

Since our last inspection of this standard the agency had introduced various systems to monitor and assess the quality of care the agency provided to people. These included systems to obtain feedback from people about the quality of service they received, ensure the needs of people receiving a service were met, and to ensure that staff were adequately trained and supervised. We sampled these systems during our inspection on 14 February 2013 and found that they were in the early stages of use. This meant that for some systems there was limited information for us to review. However, we could see that the provider had taken action to meet the standard and improve the quality of care for people who received a service from them.

1, 2, 5 October 2012

During a routine inspection

The commissioning local authority had informed us that they had serious concerns about the service provided by this agency, following complaints received in relation to poor service, staff training and management, reporting and recording, and management of medicines.

We spoke with six people who were able to tell us their views about this agency, and the relatives of three other people. All told us they were happy with the care provided by, and trusted, the regular care workers who visited them. We found that two people had chosen to make other arrangements for their care when their regular care workers were not available because they had been unhappy with care provided by other staff supplied by the agency.

We found that care plans were not sufficiently detailed to provide staff with all the information needed to ensure that people's needs were met. Records relating to three of the four people we visited who received assistance with their medicines were not accurately or completely maintained. Staff had not been properly supervised to ensure they were meeting people's needs in a safe way.

We were not provided with any evidence that the provider or Registered Manager was effectively monitoring the service or had learned from past experience.