Care Hearted West Midlands

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.

Whilst people told us they received their medicines when they needed them the provider was unable to demonstrate the management of medicines was consistently safe. Action was being taken to address this. Staff had completed training in safe medicines management and their competency to administer medicines safely had been assessed by their managers.

People's needs were assessed before they started using the service. However, assessments needed to be further developed to ensure protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010 were fully considered. Information contained within people's care records varied and the providers approach to care planning and involving people in their care was inconsistent. The nominated individual acknowledged these areas needed development. Action was being taken to make improvements.

People felt safe with their care workers and safeguarding procedures protected people from harm. Managers and staff understood their responsibilities to keep people safe. Staff knew how to manage risks associated with people's care, but risk management plans did not always contain the information staff needed to help them provide safe care.

Staff were recruited safely. The provider was actively trying to recruit new staff including a manager. Enough staff were available to provide the care and support people needed and people told us the times staff arrived to provide their care had recently improved. People's confidence in the leadership of the service had increased but it was not evident how feedback gathered from people had been used to drive forward improvement. People knew how to complain but more needed to be done to demonstrate lessons had been learnt to improve quality when complaints had been received.

Risks associated with COVID-19 had not always been assessed in line with the providers policy and national

guidance. People told us staff followed safe infection and prevention and control practice in their homes. Staff had completed training in this area to protect people from the risks of infection.

People were not supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff did not support them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service did not support this practice.

People received their care from a small number of consistent staff who they knew and trusted. People and relatives had confidence in the ability of the staff to provide effective care. Staff had completed an induction when they had started work at the service. Staff training records were updated after our visit to accurately reflect the training staff had completed.

Whilst staff knew what people liked to eat and people spoke positively about the way staff prepared their meals more information needed to be added to care records to ensure meals were prepared in line with peoples wishes. The service worked with other professionals to improve outcomes for people.

People and their relatives told us staff were kind and caring and staff knew the people they cared for well. People were respected, and staff explained how they maintained people's privacy and dignity. Staff felt supported, enjoyed their jobs and understood what the management team expected of them.