Alcedo Care West Lancashire and Merseyside

This was the first inspection of Kare Plus (Southport) since it was registered in December 2017.

Kare Plus (Southport) operates as a franchise of Kare Plus. It provides care and support to people in their own homes including; companionship, home help and personal care. This report focuses on the experiences of people who received personal care as part of their support package. The people currently using the service are older people, some of whom are living with dementia.

At the time of our inspection Kare Plus (Southport) was providing a service to 35 people. There were 23 people receiving the regulated activity of personal care.

The service had a registered manager in place at the time of the inspection.

A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (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.

People received personalised care which was responsive to people's needs and wishes. Staff were knowledgeable regarding people's support and how they wish to be treated in their own home.

People had a plan of care which was centred around their individual support needs. This included some information about their routines, likes, dislikes, preference and choices to enable staff to deliver this how they wished. We found some inconsistencies in the detail recorded and we discussed with the registered manager way of improving these records to provide more individualised care records.

Risks to people's health and risks identified within people's homes were identified during an initial assessment and control measures were put in place to minimise these risks to provide safe care.

People and relatives were complimentary regarding the caring and polite attitude of the staff. Staff respected people's right to privacy and to be treated with dignity.

The registered manager ensured a consistent staff team to support people in their own home.

Communication between relatives, people being supported, staff and senior management was effective.

Staff members we spoke with fully understood the importance of acknowledging people's diversity, treating people equally and ensure that they promoted people's rights.

People who required support with their medicines received them safely and the staff had completed training in the safe administration of medicines, which included observations and competency assessments. Medicine audits were completed to look at errors and lessen the risk of re-occurrence.

Staff had been recruited safely to ensure they were suitable to work with vulnerable people.

Staff had received training in the protection of adults and knew what action they should take if they suspected or witnessed abuse.

The provider understood the legal requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and took the necessary action if they had concerns about people's capacity. We spoke with the registered manager regarding better recording of outcomes from the mental capacity assessments to ensure people were fully protected.

People were very much encouraged to have choice and control of their lives and were involved with decisions about their support. Their consent was sought around day-to-day decisions.

Staff received regular support and training to keep up to date with best practice. Staff told us the training programme was good and provided them with the skills to support people safely.

We saw liaison with community based professionals to support people in their own home thus maintaining their health needs and independence.

People were fully supported to follow their chosen interests and maintain relationships with relatives and friends that mattered to them.

People had access to a complaints procedure. Complaints received were logged, investigated and responded to. No one at the time of the inspection raised any concerns, all the feedback we received was very positive.

Quality assurance processes were in place to monitor standards and lead on improvements. This included quality checks on how the service was delivered and seeking people's views about the agency. Feedback from people and their relatives informed us the agency was well managed and staff well trained.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

The five questions we ask about services and what we found