Das Care Limited

Ratings

• Overall

  Requires improvement

• Safe

  Requires improvement

• Effective

  Good

• Caring

  Good

• Responsive

  Good

• Well-led

  Requires improvement

Our view of the service

Date of assessment: 11 September to 5 November 2024. At our last inspection, the service was rated requires improvement. At this assessment we found the provider had made improvements to comply with 1 regulation. However, during this assessment we found 2 breaches of legal regulation in relation to safe care and treatment and governance arrangements. This means the service needs to make improvements in these areas. Our overall service rating remains requires improvement. We found areas of concern and good practice. The provider had assessed people’s care needs; however, they did not adequately assess and mitigate the risks to people’s health and safety. People’s care records were not always updated when their needs changed and lacked personalisation. It was unclear whether people’s care was being monitored and reviewed. People’s medicines were not always managed safely. Safety checks of people’s equipment were not robust. The provider failed to demonstrate clear oversight of incidents, accidents, and safeguarding concerns. There were insufficient systems to support oversight and governance at the service. Not all areas of the service were being audited and for those areas that were, the provider had failed to identify and address the issues we found during this assessment. Staff had not received training to meet people’s specialist care needs. The provider had not ensured safe recruitment practices were consistently followed. The provider failed to manage the risks of staff working alone. Records of staff and management meetings indicated a lack of reflective practice, learning and actions. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of the lives. There were enough staff in place to meet people’s needs. Staff felt supported by the provider. In instances where CQC have decided to take civil or criminal enforcement action against a provider, we will publish this information on our website after any representations and/ or appeals have been concluded.

People's experience of this service

Whilst people, relatives, and friends we spoke with expressed they were happy with their care, our assessment found people were not always being supported in line with expected standards. People were placed at risk of poor care and support because the governance systems were not effective and needed strengthening and embedding into the practice. Although some audits were taking place they had failed to identify and address the issues we found during our assessment of the service. We found no evidence people had been harmed. However, risk management of people’s care required improvement. Known risks were not always assessed. Records relating to safety checks and maintenance of people’s equipment to support their care and treatment were either not in place or were not fully completed. People did not always receive their medicines safely as prescribed for them. We found that people did not always receive regular reviews of their care and treatment. We also found people's care records were not always updated as people's care needs changed. People had not always been asked for their feedback on the quality of the care they received. However, people, relatives and friends told us they were happy with the care they or their loved one received from the service. People spoke positively about the staff. We were told staff were friendly, caring, helpful, attentive, and treated people with dignity and respect. People told us staff knew what they were doing, they supported them to be independent, and they felt involved in planning their own care. People and relatives told us they had no concerns about raising complaints, and at times staff went over and above to support them. People knew who the manager was, and felt able to approach them, and found them friendly and caring.