Cera - Derbyshire

Updated 20 November 2018

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection checked whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This comprehensive inspection took place on 25 September 2018 and was announced. We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection visit because we needed to be sure the registered manager would be available.

Before the inspection we asked the provider to complete a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what it does well and improvements they plan to make. We reviewed information we held about the service, including notifications of incidents that had occurred in the service, which the provider is required to send us by law. We contacted commissioners, responsible for funding some of the people using the service, to gain their views about the care provided.

The inspection team consisted of an inspector and an Expert by Experience. An Expert by Experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service. They carried out telephone interviews with people prior to the office-based inspection. They attempted to speak with 25 people and spoke with 18. The inspector visited the office location to see the registered manager, office staff and to speak with care staff.

During the inspection, we spoke with two members of the care staff, a care coordinator and a team leader, the deputy manager and registered manager.

We looked at records relating to four people who used the service as well as staff recruitment records. We looked at other information related to the running of and the quality of the service. This included quality assurance audits, training information for care staff, staff duty rotas, meeting minutes and arrangements for managing complaints.

We asked the registered manager to send us copies of various policies and procedures after the inspection. They did this within the requested timeframe.

Updated 20 November 2018

We carried out an announced inspection of the service on 25 September 2018. Mears Care Chapel en le Frith is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats. It currently provides a service to older and younger adults. Not everyone using the service receives regulated activity; CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also consider any wider social care provided.

There was a registered manager in post at the time of our inspection. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission 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 time of the inspection, 150 people received some element of support with their personal care. This is the service’s first inspection under its current registration.

People felt staff supported them safely and protected them from avoidable harm. The risks to people’s safety were appropriately assessed and acted on. There were enough staff to meet people’s needs and people told us staff mainly attended calls on time. People’s medicines were managed safely and staff understood how to reduce the risk of the spread of infection. The provider had processes in place to investigate accidents and incidents and to learn from mistakes.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service support this practice. People’s care was provided in line with current legislation and best practice guidelines.

People felt staff were well trained and understood how to support them. Where needed, people received effective support from staff with their meals. People had access to other health and social care agencies when professional input was needed.

People liked the staff and found them to be kind, caring and respectful, and they always treated them with dignity during personal care. People were involved with decisions about their care and felt staff listened to and acted on their wishes. Independence was encouraged and people’s records were stored safely and in line with data protection legislation.

People were assessed before joining the service to ensure their needs could be met. Where appropriate, people were supported by staff with their hobbies and interests. People’s care records were person centred and people told us they received their care in their preferred way. People’s diverse needs were discussed with them and respected. People had not felt the need to make a formal complaint, however we saw appropriate action had been taken by the registered manager where needed. Efforts had been made to discuss end of life care with people, however records relating to this element of care required more detail.

The service was well-led by a respected and well liked registered manager. They had the support of their provider to develop and improve the service as well as supporting social inclusion. This included supporting people to become involved with their local community. Staff felt valued with high-quality performance rewarded. Auditing processes were in place. The provider supported the registered manager to carry out their role effectively and held them to account.