Medacs Healthcare - London

We have made a recommendation about the use of standardised pressure area risk assessment tools.

There were enough staff to safely cover all care visits, which usually happened on time although some improvements to punctuality were required. The provider used safe recruitment systems to help ensure people only received care from suitable staff. There were effective systems in place to protect people from risks associated with abuse and neglect, infection and the unsafe management of medicines.

Improvements to the provider's quality assurance system meant the registered manager was already aware of and was working on several areas they needed to improve. This included communication between care staff and office staff, which people felt was not always good. Leadership was visible and the provider was open and honest when things went wrong, making sure they learned lessons and acted to prevent things going wrong again. The provider sought and acted on feedback from people, their families and 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. The provider assessed the capacity of people to make decisions about their care in line with relevant legislation.

Staff knew how to provide appropriate care at the end of people's lives and listened to what people said

they wanted at this time. We have made a recommendation about exploring and recording these preferences in advance.

People had detailed assessments to allow care to be planned and delivered in line with guidance. Staff worked well with other agencies to do this and made sure people had the support they needed to stay healthy and eat well. Staff received the support and training they needed to care for people effectively.

The provider had improved their systems for responding to people's complaints and concerns. People were satisfied with how their complaints were handled. The care and support people received was personalised and met their needs, and people were generally happy with it. People received information in suitable formats so they understood it. The provider took steps to protect people from the risk of social isolation.

The provider had made improvements to how staff were deployed, meaning people were more consistently supported by the same staff and were able to build good relationships with them. People and their relatives were involved in planning care and their views were listened to. People received the support they needed from kind, caring and respectful staff who promoted dignity and independence.