MKF Homecare Limited

This service is a domiciliary care agency. MKF provides care and support to people living in their own homes in the community. At the time of our inspection they were providing a service to 23 people with the regulated activity of personal care.

The service had a registered manager in post who was present on the day of our inspection. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the CQC to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are 'registered persons'. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

At the last inspection we found the service was not consistently well led. There were insufficient quality assurance systems in place to monitor the service effectively.

People told us that they felt safe. There were safeguarding procedures in place to help protect people from harm and staff had received effective training in safeguarding people. Staff understood their responsibilities and were able to describe the process they would follow if they had any concerns about people's safety.

Potential risks to the health and well-being of people had been assessed and where risks were identified, appropriate actions had been taken to help mitigate and reduce risk. These were kept under review to ensure they were current and effective.

No accident or incidents had been recorded and the registered manager confirmed that they had not had any, but if any incidents did occur they would record them and complete relevant notifications.

People were supported by a small and consistent team of care staff and there were sufficient staff deployed to provide the care and support people required. The service had a recruitment procedure in place to ensure the safe recruitment of all staff. This was undergoing some developmental work at the time of our inspection to ensure a more consistent approach.

People were supported to take their medicines as prescribed by staff who had received training and had their competency checked. People were supported to maintain their health and well-being and accessed the services of health professionals. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them to remain as independent as possible. People were asked to sign their care plan to give their consent and agreement.

People had been involved in the development and planning of their care and deciding how and when their

care was provided. Each person had a detailed care plan which reflected their needs, and was reviewed periodically.

Staff were supported and had the skills and knowledge to care for people effectively. They had received training and supervision, which was being further developed to ensure consistency. Spot checks were completed and used effectively to help with personal development.

People were provided with a service by staff who were kind and caring. Staff were respectful of people's dignity and privacy. Staff were knowledgeable about the people they supported and had developed positive and respectful relationships.

People knew how to raise concerns or complaints, although no 'formal' concerns had been recorded. Feedback on the service was encouraged and was shared with staff for learning and development which helped address and resolve any potential concerns before they became a complaint.

We noted that improvements had been made since the last inspection. The registered manager had put systems and processes in place to help monitor the overall quality and safety of the service. However, they had not yet completed a survey or questionnaire to obtain peoples feedback to enable them to evaluate what the service does well and where improvements were required. Although this was being addressed at the time of our inspection this had been an outstanding action from the previous inspection.

The five questions we ask about services and what we found