Background to this inspection
Updated
1 November 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 inspection took place between 21 June 2018 and 4 September 2018 and was announced. We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection visit because it is small and we wanted to make sure staff would be available to speak with.
On 21 June 2018 we visited the office to speak with the manager, office staff, to review care records, and policies and procedures. We spoke with people on 15 June 2018 before our visit to the agency office and with staff providing care between 21 June and 4 September 2018.
This inspection was carried out by two inspectors and an expert by experience. An expert-by-experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.
Prior to this inspection we reviewed the information available to us about the service, such as the notifications that they had sent us. A notification is information about important events which the provider is required to send us by law. We also 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 improvement they plan to make.
We spoke with five people using the service. We spoke with five members of care staff and the registered manager. We checked six people’s care records and medicines administration records (MARs). We checked records relating to the management of the service, such as audits, staff recruitment, training and health and safety records.
Updated
1 November 2018
This inspection of Sagecare (Peterborough) took place between 21 June 2018 and 4 September 2018. Our visit to the office was announced to make sure staff were available.
Sagecare (Peterborough) is a domiciliary care agency that provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats in the community. It provides a service to older adults. At the time of our visit 158 people were using the service.
Not everyone using Sagecare (Peterborough) received a regulated activity; CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also take into account any wider social care provided.
There was a registered manager at this agency who was supported by an office manager and other senior staff. 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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.’
At our previous inspection between 7 and 9 June 2017 we rated this service as Requires Improvement in relation to medicine management and care plans. The rating has improved to Good at this inspection. Following the last inspection, we asked the provider to complete an action plan to show what they would do and by when to improve the key questions Well-led to at least Good. They told us that they would meet the legal requirements by 30 September 2017.
The provider’s monitoring process looked at systems relating to the care of people, where issues were identified action was taken to resolve these. People’s views were sought and action put into place to improve issues that were raised.
Medicines were administered safely and there was clear information and guidance in people’s care plans for staff to follow when giving medicines in specific ways. Care plans were written in detail and contained guidance for staff to follow.
Staff knew how to respond to possible harm and how to reduce risks to people. Lessons were learned from accidents and incidents and changes to practise were shared with staff members to reduce further occurrences. There were enough staff who had been recruited properly to make sure they were suitable to work with people. Staff used personal protective equipment to reduce the risk of cross infection to people.
People were cared for by staff who had received the appropriate training and had the skills and support to carry out their roles. Staff members understood and complied with the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. People received support with meals, if this was needed.
Staff were caring, kind and treated people with respect. People were listened to and were involved in their care and what they did on a day to day basis. People’s right to privacy was maintained by the actions and care given by staff members.
There was enough information for staff to contact health care professionals if needed and staff followed the advice professionals gave them. People’s personal and health care needs were met and care records guided staff in how to do this.
A complaints system was in place and there was information available so people knew who to speak with if they had concerns. Staff had guidance to care for people at the end of their lives if this became necessary.
Further information is in the detailed findings below