ICare Nottingham Ltd

People's experience of using this service: People's needs associated with risk had been assessed, but not fully explored to ensure staff had sufficient guidance to support and manage any known risks. Recruitment processes were not robust enough to ensure people employed were safe to work with the people who used the service. Where people required medicine, this was administered as prescribed, but the provider did not always follow their policy and procedure when administering medicines for people. People and their families felt safe with the staff that cared for them. Safeguarding systems were in place. People were protected from cross contamination because staff followed infection control policy and procedures. Systems were in place to monitor Incident and accidents

People's needs were assessed and included protected characteristics under the equality act 2010 and this was considered in people's care plans. Staff were knowledgeable about the people they cared for, but when they cared for people living with a condition, such as, dementia the care plan lacked instruction how staff should care for the person. People consented to the care and support, but those who lacked capacity had no mental capacity assessments completed for decisions they needed to make, or decisions made in their best interest. Staff attended an induction and training relevant to their role, including a basic English and Maths test. People were supported to eat and drink according to their culture, religion and preferences. The provider worked with other professionals and implemented recommendations to help achieve a positive outcome for people's health and wellbeing.

People were cared for by kind, compassionate and caring staff. People had an opportunity to discuss their care and support on a regular basis. Advocate support was acquired if people needed support to express their views. People were shown respect and their dignity was protected always.

Care was planned and developed with people and their families. Systems were in place to monitor and address complaints. End of life care was developed, but staff required training in in this area.

There was a registered manager in post and they had clear oversight of the service, which they planned to develop further. However, staff rotas were not recorded. There was no future planning in place to monitor which staff were attending the care calls. Audits and quality checks were completed, but not always recorded. People were involved in discussions about their care and support. Staff felt supported by the registered manager and confident to raise issues and concerns. The registered manager was open and transparent with shortfalls in concerns we found during the inspection. The provider worked with other professionals and developed networks within the community.