Archived: Cera - Stowmarket

Updated 2 August 2018

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 announced comprehensive inspection was carried out by one inspector. We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection visit because we needed to be sure that someone would be available. We also wanted people to give permission for us to visit them in their own home.

The inspection site visit activity started on 7 June 2018. On the first day we visited the office location, we spoke with the registered manager, the training manager, a care co-ordinator and five members of staff. We visited five people in their own homes, and also spoke with two relatives. We also spoke with the staff at the service’s office. On 11 June 2018 we returned to the service office to inspect records, including six people’s care records, records relating to the management of the service, training records, medicine audits and the recruitment records of three care workers. During the week commencing 18 June 2018 we spoke with 10 people and three relatives by telephone.

We used information the provider sent us in the Provider Information Return. This is information we require providers to send us at least once annually to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

We looked at information we held about the service including notifications they had made to us about important events. We also reviewed all other information sent to us from other stakeholders for example the local authority and members of the public.

Updated 2 August 2018

Mears Care - Stowmarket is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own homes. It provides a service to adults. At the time of this announced inspection there were 120 people who used the service.

At the last inspection of 19 September 2016, the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good overall and Caring had improved to Outstanding. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

The service had 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 21008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run. People, relative and staff described the registered manager as supportive and approachable.

People using the service and their relatives told us about the ‘outstanding care’ the service staff provided. Words used to describe the care were outstanding and it could not be better. Members of staff were described as caring and competent. People using the service and their relatives complimented the staff on their positive attitude, turning up on time through all weathers, never missing a visit and being consistent, anticipating and responding to a deterioration in the person’s health.

Staff were empathic and treated people with understanding. People’s privacy and dignity were respected. Staff encouraged people to maintain and develop their independent living skills.

People continued to be safe because the staff had received training and were aware of procedures to safeguard people from abuse and manage risks to their health. Each person had a detailed support plan and staff were aware of people’s individual needs. People usually received support from the same staff.

There were robust recruitment procedures in place. People received their medicines as prescribed and information about their medicines had been recorded and medicine audits were carried out by senior staff. There were infection control procedures in place to guide the staff in how to minimise the risks of cross infection. The manager met with senior staff at the service and their manager regularly to review the service and determine if any lessons could be learnt from events.

Staff received training and supervision to enable to them to provide the support to people with regard to their assessed needs. People gave consent to the support they received. People were given support to manage their nutrition and accessed healthcare services when required.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. The policies and systems in the service support this practice.

People continued to receive support which met their individual needs and preferences. Each person had an assessment of their needs and support plan which was updated regularly as required. Staff having recognised some people were lonely had worked to support them attend clubs set up by and supported by the service staff. People knew how to raise a complaint and were confident any concerns raised would be addressed and resolved. The service had worked with other professionals to support people at the end of their lives.

There was an open and positive culture was maintained by the service. The registered manager led and supported the staff team to focus upon person-centred support. Quality checks and audits remained in place so that issues were identified and resolutions for improvements put in place. The service operated an on-call system to support the staff providing support and also to cover any care visits that the usual member of staff was unable to attend.