Archived: CRG Homecare - Bolton

CRG Homecare - Bolton is a domiciliary care agency, registered to provide personal care to people of all ages. At the time of inspection, the service was providing support to 183 people across areas in Bolton and Bury.

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.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

Robust systems were in place to analyse and assess risks to people. People felt safe while receiving care. Due to staffing shortages the provider had used agency staff to cover care hours; however, the provider was promoting recruitment as a priority. People, relatives and staff all reported staff followed good infection control practice. Not all staff were able to explain who they would contact to report safeguarding concerns. We discussed this with the provider, who responded appropriately. We have made a recommendation about staff recruitment and their awareness of safeguarding processes.

Staff showed a good understanding of how to support different cultural backgrounds. Staff feedback about induction was positive; however, some staff explained they hadn’t received follow up training and were unable to demonstrate an understanding in certain areas such as the Mental Capacity Act. We discussed this with the provider who evidenced these areas were covered in new staff’s induction and said feedback from staff training would be addressed. We have made a recommendation the provider monitors the progress in relation to training. Some people said organisation relating to the scheduling of their calls was inconsistent. People’s calls were not always carried out in accordance with allocated arrival times and the duration of calls were not always consistent with times set out in people’s care plans. People said there was a notable difference between agency and CRG staff in the timeliness of calls. We have made a recommendation the provider continues to improve consistency in this area.

People and relatives stated when they had regular carers, the support they received was very good. The provider had recently implemented a new electronic system; the system allowed for people’s care plans and records to be live documents where reviews could be carried out as often as needed. Additionally, alerts were sent to the office staff and management team, if tasks such as administering medication, making meals and personal care were not carried out. Records were person centred and provided staff with clear guidance on how people wished to be supported. Staff showed a good understanding of person centred care. People and relatives felt care staff provided appropriate support when people had difficulties communicating.

There were robust systems in place for oversight and auditing. People did not always receive follow up calls when they had raised concerns. Some staff did not always feel supported by the management team. Staff reported late changes to rota’s without consultation, a lack of a general supportive approach and carers being blamed for late calls to clients. However, most staff acknowledged the organisation was improving and understood that low staffing levels within the management and care team had made organisation difficult. Staff based in the office praised support they received from the provider and stated regional managers had committed significant resources and hours into addressing staffing levels and organisation within the branch. We have made a recommendation the provider monitors progress on support provided to staff and in responding to complaints.

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.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

This service was registered with us on 23/09/2021 and this is the first inspection.

Why we inspected

The inspection was prompted in part due to concerns received about governance and staffing levels. A decision was made for us to inspect and examine those risks.

We have found evidence that the provider needs to make improvements. Please see the Effective section of this full report.

You can see what action we have asked the provider to take at the end of this full report.

Follow up

We will request an action plan for the provider to understand what they will do to improve the standards of quality and safety. We will work alongside the provider and local authority to monitor progress. We will return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.