Copthorne Complete Home Care Limited

On this page

• Overview
• Learning culture
• Safe systems, pathways and transitions
• Safeguarding
• Involving people to manage risks
• Safe environments
• Safe and effective staffing
• Infection prevention and control
• Medicines optimisation

We have recommended that the provider follows more robust procedures relating to staff recruitment. Systems to investigate and learn from accidents and incidents had improved. Risk assessments were in place to manage and reduce people's risk of harm and these were understood by staff. Staff were trained in safeguarding people from abuse and understood how to report concerns. Care plans provided staff with an overview of people's care needs and these were regularly reviewed. People received their medicines when they needed them from staff who were trained and competent. Staff received regular supervisions and training. People were protected from risks associated with the control and spread of infection.

This service scored 62 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People felt safe with the staff who supported them and with the care they received. A relative said, “I am happy with the staff that support [name of person] and confident that they keep them safe.” People benefitted from a learning culture when things went wrong. A relative told us, “If ever there is a mistake made by staff, it is corrected, and [name of registered manager] ensures that lessons are learnt from it.”

Staff told us about the improvements since our last assessment. A member of staff said, “If we report something the manager responds quickly and gives us feedback either one to one or in a meeting. Reviews are done following incidents and risk assessments, and care plans are updated.”

Systems to investigate and learn from accidents, incidents and complaints had improved. Although there had been very few events, there was evidence that these were investigated and discussed with the staff team so that any learning was shared with the staff supporting people. People’s care plans and risk assessments were updated to reflect any changes as a result.

People and, where appropriate, their relatives were involved in planning and reviewing the care they received.

Improvements had been made to ensure staff had access to people’s care plans and risk assessments which gave them up to date information about people’s needs.

The partners we contacted did not have any feedback to share. However, the registered manager liaised with appropriate authorities where required.

Since our last assessment the provider has introduced a computerised care planning system which ensures all staff have easy access to people’s care plans and risk assessments when they are supporting people. The registered manager was now able to demonstrate they had the necessary skills and training to ensure staff remained competent in their role and tasks they performed.

People and their relatives did not express any concerns about the care and support provided. A relative said, “I am happy with the staff that support [name of person] and confident that they keep them safe.”

Staff told us they had received additional training about how to recognise and report abuse. They knew how and when to report concerns both internally and to other organisations such as the local authority, CQC and the police. A member of staff told us, “I have a copy of the safeguarding policy and know who to report concerns to.”

Since the last assessment improvements had been made to ensure staff had the necessary skills and knowledge to recognise and report any concerns. Staff had received additional training in safeguarding adults from abuse and the provider’s policies had been reviewed and updated. Where there had been concerns about a person, the registered manager had informed the appropriate authorities such as the local authority safeguarding team and CQC.

Risks to people, including environmental risks were assessed and plans were in place to help keep people safe.

Improvements had been made and staff told us they had access to people’s risk assessments, and they understood how to recognise potential risks and support people to manage risks in a safe way. A member of staff said, “I discuss with the client involved on safe practice when using mobile aids such as a wheelchair or walking sticks.” Another member of staff told us, “By following the risk assessment process we can determine what could go wrong and who could be harmed. We take a person-centred approach to manage any risks.”

Following our last assessment the provider had made improvements to ensure staff had access to up-to-date risk assessments. These included risks associated with eating and drinking, skin integrity, falls, moving and handling, oral care and risks associated with medical or mental health conditions and people’s environment. Risk assessments had been regularly reviewed to ensure they remained reflective of people’s needs.

We did not look at Safe environments during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

People were supported by a regular staff team who knew them well. People’s relatives told us they always knew who would be visiting and that staff arrived on time and stayed for the allocated time. A relative said, “[Relative] always has the same carer but if they can’t make it they always let me know. They always send the same alternative carer so [relative] always knows who is supporting them.” Another relative told us, “I feel the staff do have the right knowledge and training, [name of registered manager] ensures this”

Staff told us they received the training needed to carry out their role. This included additional training to meet the needs of people with a learning disability or autistic people. Staff told us they always knew who they would be visiting and that they had sufficient time with people to meet their needs. Staff had access to the provider’s ‘no response’ policy and knew what to do if they could not access a person’s home.

The provider did not always ensure safe recruitment processes were followed. For example, one staff member’s file did not contain a reference from their previous employer. Another file contained only one reference, and dates of employment conflicted with what was on the application form. One staff file did not contain an application form. However, improvements had been made to ensure staff had the necessary skills and training to carry out their role. This included recognised training in supporting people who have a learning disability. The registered manager was able to demonstrate they had the skills and training to assess the competency of staff’s skills and knowledge.

People were protected from the risks associated with the spread of infection because staff followed the provider’s procedures and best practice. People’s relatives told us staff always wore gloves and apron’s when assisting their loved one with personal care.

Staff had received training in infection, prevention and control and understood the importance of following correct procedures. Staff told us they had good supplies of disposable gloves and aprons and were provided with uniforms.

An infection, prevention and control policy was in place which was regularly reviewed to ensure it reflected current guidance and best practice. Staff had received training in infection, prevention and control.

People received their medicines when they needed them from staff who were trained and competent in their role. A relative told us, “I have no issues with how staff support [name of person] with their medicines. There have never been any mistakes made by staff. I have witnessed [name of registered manager] assessing staff when they come and support [name of person].” Another relative said, “I get [relative’s] tablets ready in a dosette box. If I make a mistake with them, the carer calls me and lets me know. [Relative] just needs prompting to take them as they will forget. Staff seem to be very conscientious about [relative’s] medication.”

Staff told us they had received training in the safe management and administration of medicines and had regular checks on their competency. One member of staff said, “I have received the training and have had checks on my competency. I do not administer insulin or dress wounds because I am not trained to do that.”

The registered manager was able to demonstrate they had received the required training to support people with their medicines and assess the competency of the staff team. There were policies and procedures in place for the safe management and administration of people’s medicines and these were understood and followed by staff. There were protocols in place for medicines prescribed on an ‘as required’ basis which helped to ensure staff followed a consistent approach and people received their medicines when needed.