Maycare

Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also consider any wider social care provided.

The provider had implemented a system of auditing since the last inspection. The registered manager completed a daily audit which identified, for example, if there had been missed visits or medicines concerns. Weekly meetings were held between the registered manager and office management staff. However, the provider had not identified the concerns we found during this inspection.

The provider had improved the way they recruited new staff but needed to ensure their policy met the regulation.

People were supported with their medicines when necessary and the provider had improved their monitoring of missed medicines. Appropriate action had been taken in response to errors and the number of medicines issues had reduced. Staff had received training in administering medicines and most had their competency assessed by senior staff who had undertaken advanced training for medicines administration.

The provider raised safeguarding concerns with the local authority when these were identified. However, we identified one issue which the provider had not identified as a safeguarding concern. The provider subsequently notified the local authority.

Risk assessments identified when people needed the support of two staff. However, for one person the risk assessment had not been updated to show their care needs had changed and they needed the support of two staff. The provider had a system in place to assess people's needs before offering them a service.

We received mostly positive feedback from people, their relatives and staff about the service provided. The provider sought the views of people using the service through reviews both over the telephone and face to face. People were supported by staff who were trained and used personal protective equipment such as

disposable aprons and gloves, appropriately. Some people were assessed as needing support with fluids and meals and this was detailed in care plans. Records showed people consented to their care and support.

People told us they felt staff were kind when supporting them. People and their relatives told us they could make decisions about their care and staff respected their decisions. People and their relatives told us they felt their privacy and dignity was respected by care staff. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People had care plans in place which detailed their care and support needs and preferences. The registered manager told us they ensured people were provided with information in ways they could understand. The provider had a complaints procedure in place and people told us they could complain and were happy with the response.

The provider had systems in place to investigate where things had gone wrong and took action to reduce the risk of this happening again. Staff and management liaised with other agencies and health and social care professionals when necessary. The provider had regularly engaged with the local authority adult services.