Archived: Careline Homecare (Leeds)

Below is the summary of what we found but if you want to see the evidence supporting our summary please read our full report. The summary is based on speaking with people who used the service, the staff supporting them and from looking at records.

Is the service safe?

People told us they were treated with dignity and their rights were respected. One person said, “Everything is done nicely and with respect for my dignity. They are so pleasant and friendly.”

The Manager had a number of different measures in place to check systems were safe and working effectively. This included audits on daily notes, care plans, risk assessments and medication administration.

Rotas were planned to suit the needs of the people who used the service. Staff and the Manager told us they could be flexible in arranging and re-arranging times to suit people who used the service.

People were protected from the risks of unsafe or inappropriate care and treatment because accurate and appropriate records were maintained.

Is the service effective?

People who used the service were asked about their care and able to make decisions. People who used the service said they were always asked for their consent before care tasks were carried out. One person said, “Staff always ask me before they do anything and check I am OK with that.” Another said, “They always ask me first and say it is up to me.”

People’s needs were assessed and care and treatment was planned and delivered in line with their individual care plan. We spoke with four people who used the service and one relative. People said they were aware of their care and support plans or those of their family member. They said they had agreed them when they had first started using the service. There were written contracts in place regarding what people who used the service could expect.

Is the service caring?

People who used the service told us they were happy with the care and support received. They said the standards of care provided were high. Their comments included:

“Staff are very kind and helpful, they always have enough time for you and time for a chat.”

“I am treated very, very well, they are so kind.”

Staff demonstrated a very good knowledge of people’s care, support needs and routines. They could describe individual care needs provided for people who used the service. It was clear they knew people well and genuinely cared for people and their welfare.

Is the service responsive?

People who used the service told us they knew how to complain or raise concerns if they had any. One person told us they had expressed some dissatisfaction with the service and this had immediately been looked into and put right.

Others told us the service was responsive and flexible to their needs, for example, changing call times if they had appointments or social events to attend.

Is the service well led?

The provider had an effective system to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people received.

The Provider sent out annual questionnaires for people who used the service. We saw these were in the process of being returned. The Regional Manager said the information would be collated and analysed to assess people’s satisfaction with the service and see where any improvements could be made.

All the feedback records we looked at showed people were happy with the service and any suggestions for change had been acted upon. The Provider took account of complaints and comments to improve the service. We looked at records of complaints made and saw these were responded to and investigated properly.

Staff said they felt the service was well managed and the Manager was approachable. They said they had confidence in the Manager and that any issues brought to her attention were always dealt with properly and thoroughly. One member of staff said, “They are very good, very well organised, plenty of training courses to make sure we do our job well.”

The provider had an effective system in place to identify, assess and manage risks to the health, safety and welfare of people using the service and others. This meant there was a system in place to help identify issues in a timely manner to ensure people who used the service were protected from the risk of inappropriate or unsafe care and treatment.

The provider had made significant improvements in relation to records. However, the provider had not fully addressed the issues regarding the lack of detail within people’s care records. We therefore could not be confident that people were protected from the risks of unsafe or inappropriate care and treatment.

“My carer is absolutely fantastic. She’s superb.”

“She’s an absolute treasure. Very professional.”

“They are very helpful and kind. They can’t do enough for you.”

Through speaking with both people who used the service and staff we found that people’s care needs had been met. However, we found this was not always reflected in people’s care records. We found that people’s personal records were not accurate and fit for purpose.

Staff had received safeguarding training and were aware of their role and responsibilities in identifying, reporting and recording abuse. We saw that safeguarding procedures had been followed to keep people safe.

An induction training plan and induction checklist were in place which included the following training: moving and handling, medication and safeguarding. Staff confirmed they had received induction training and mandatory training; however this was not reflected in the staff records we looked at. We found staff records and other records relevant to the management of the service were not accurate and fit for purpose.

At the time of our visit the provider did not have an effective system in place to identify, assess and manage risks to the health, safety and welfare of people who used the service.