Archived: CRG Homecare - Newcastle

CRG Homecare Gateshead is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to adults living in their own houses and flats in the community.

Not everyone using CRG Homecare Gateshead receives the 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. On the days of our inspection there were 130 people using the service.

At our last inspection we rated the service good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good. There was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

Accidents and incidents were appropriately recorded and risk assessments were in place. Staff understood their responsibilities with regard to safeguarding and had been trained in protecting vulnerable adults.

Appropriate arrangements were in place for the safe administration of medicines.

There were enough staff on duty to meet the needs of people. The provider had processes in place for monitoring and auditing call visit data such as missed calls, timeliness and duration.

The provider had an effective recruitment and selection procedure in place and carried out relevant vetting checks when they employed staff. Staff were suitably trained and received regular supervisions and appraisals.

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 supported this practice.

People’s needs were assessed before they started using the service. People were supported with their dietary and healthcare needs, and support plans were written in a person-centred way. Person-centred means ensuring the person is at the centre of any care or support and their individual wishes, needs and choices were considered.

People and were complimentary about the standard of care provided by CRG Homecare Gateshead. Staff treated people with dignity and respect and helped to maintain people’s independence by encouraging them to care for themselves where possible.

People were protected from social isolation and supported to access the local community.

The provider had a complaints procedure in place, and people were aware of how to make a complaint.

The provider had an effective quality assurance process in place. Staff said they felt supported by the registered manager. People and staff were regularly consulted about the quality of the service.

We last inspected this service in November 2013. At that inspection we found the service was meeting the legal requirements in force at the time.

Castlerock Recruitment Group limited is a domiciliary care agency that provides personal care predominantly to adults and older persons, some of whom may have a dementia-related condition in their own homes. It does not provide nursing care. At the time of this inspection, the service was providing care to 14 people in Sunderland and North Tyneside.

The service did not have a registered manager. The previous registered manager had left the service in May 2015. A new manager was in post at the time of this inspection and advised us they were in the process of registering. 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 a legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People were kept safe from harm. Staff received regular safeguarding training and were aware of the different types of abuse people might experience. Staff were aware of their responsibility for recognising and reporting signs of abuse. People told us they felt safe. People were asked to give their written consent to their plan of care and staff always requested verbal consent from people prior to providing care or assistance.

Possible risks to the health and safety of people using the service were assessed and appropriate actions were taken to minimise any risks identified. People were assisted to take their medicines safely by staff who had been appropriately trained.

Robust systems were in place for the recruitment of new staff members. Risk assessments were completed on any potential staff members with a criminal record to determine whether or not they were suitable for the role. Staff were given the appropriate support and training they required to work effectively, and received regular supervision.

People’s health needs were assessed prior to them joining the service. Care packages were produced with people’s input. Care records provided staff with step by step instructions on how to support people in a way of their choosing. Support was provided to people in a manner that reflected their wishes whilst also enabling them to remain as independent as possible.

Staff were described as kind and caring and people told us they were treated with respect. Regular reviews were undertaken of people’s care packages to ensure these continued to meet their needs. Where people asked for changes to be made to their care packages, they told us this was completed promptly. There was regular contact between the provider and people using the service, seeking feedback and offering support. People and their relatives felt able to raise any questions or concerns and felt these would be acted upon.

People told us they were happy with the management of the service and knew who to contact should they have any concerns. Staff we spoke with felt supported by the manager and were able to easily access support when they required it. The provider had a range of systems in place for checking the quality of the service. However record keeping around actions taken to resolve areas for improvement was poor. We recommend the provider introduces a more robust system for capturing areas for improvement and the actions taken to resolve these.

People's care needs were fully assessed and their care was planned to meet those needs. People told us they were very satisfied with the quality of their care. One person told us, "I'm very happy with the care provided." A relative said, "Our carer is brilliant, absolutely brilliant."

The service had appropriate systems in place for keeping people who used the service safe from abuse.

Staff were given the necessary training and support to meet the needs of the people they cared for.

A range of quality systems and audits were in place to make sure the service met people's needs. The service was responsive to any issues raised or identified, and people told us they had confidence in raising any concerns with the manager.