Updated 14 May 2019
The inspection:
We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.
Inspection team:
The inspection team consisted of two inspectors and two experts 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. Our experts by experience had personal experience of using domiciliary care services.
Service and service type:
Caring Direct is a domiciliary care service. It provides personal care to older and younger people, people with learning disabilities and/ or autism, physical or sensory impairments and people with dementia living in their own homes.
The service was required to have a registered manager. This means that the registered manager/s and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided. Two managers had made applications to apply to be registered with the Care Quality Commission and these were in progress at the time of the inspection.
Notice of inspection:
We gave the service nine days’ notice of the inspection because we needed to send letters to people letting them know that an expert by experience may be calling to speak to them about their views of the service.
Inspection activity started on 3 April 2019 and ended on 26 April 2019. It included making telephone calls to people who used the service to gather their feedback. We visited the office location on 16 April 2019 to see the manager and staff; and to review care records and policies and procedures.
Prior to the inspection we reviewed information we held about the service since their last inspection. This included any notifications received from the provider about deaths, accidents/incidents and safeguarding alerts which they are required to send us by law. The provider had also completed a Provider Information Return (a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make).
We looked at the care plans for six people. Records relating to the administration and management of medicines, five staff recruitment files, incidents, accidents, complaints and the quality assurance process were also checked to ensure they met the Regulations.
During the inspection we spoke with 11 people who used the service and 11 relatives. We met with the two managers, a director, administrative staff and two care staff and all made themselves available and very helpful during the inspection. We had emails from four staff along with correspondence from four health and social care professionals.
We requested additional evidence to be sent to us after our inspection. This was received in the timescales given and the information was used as part of our inspection.