The Care Quality Commission (CQC), has rated Continuity Health Care Services PVT in Hinckley, Leicestershire as inadequate and placed it into special measures following an inspection in December.
Continuity Health Care Services PVT Limited, run by a company called Continuity Healthcare Services Ltd, supports adults in their own home with physical disabilities, dementia or mental health conditions. The service was supporting 82 adults with personal care, which is the regulated activity, at the time of the inspection.
CQC identified five breaches of regulation related to safe care and treatment, good management, medicines management, staffing, and dignity and respect. CQC told the service to submit an action plan showing what immediate and widespread action it is taking in response to these concerns.
This was CQC’s first inspection of the service since it was registered. CQC has rated how safe and well-led it is as inadequate, and how effective, caring and responsive it is as requires improvement.
CQC has also placed the service into special measures which involves close monitoring to ensure people are safe while they make improvements. Special measures also provides a structured timeframe so services understand when they need to make improvements by, and what action CQC will take if this doesn’t happen.
Greg Rielly, CQC deputy director of adult social care in the east midlands, said:
“At Continuity Health Care Services PVT, we found people received inconsistent and unreliable care that put them at risk of harm. Leaders didn’t understand the service well enough to identify problems and make improvements.
“We found people weren’t receiving safe, reliable and consistent care. People and their relatives felt anxious because staff were sometimes early or late for care calls, and in some cases left early or missed them entirely. This inconsistency negatively impacted people’s experiences of receiving care.
“It was disappointing to see staff didn’t always consider people’s individual needs and preferences. Leaders hadn’t ensured staff received relevant training for their roles, as they lacked the skills needed to support people effectively. Inspectors found examples where staff hadn’t completed care plans and risk assessments before people’s care started, which meant people risked receiving inappropriate or ineffective support.
“The service didn’t manage medicines well. Leaders didn’t have the necessary oversight to ensure staff gave people their medication safely. One person who needed support with medicine administration missed ten doses of their prescribed medication.
“Because leaders didn’t manage or investigate incidents thoroughly enough, they couldn’t identify learning opportunities to improve the service. They also didn’t use incidents, concerns or safeguarding alerts to identify trends and patterns to improve people’s care and experiences.
“We have told leaders where they need to make urgent improvements, and we will closely monitor the service to ensure people remain safe while this happens.”
Inspectors found:
- Leaders didn’t ensure people received care from consistent staff members who knew their needs and preferences.
- The service didn’t work well with partners, which resulted in people receiving inconsistent care, including when moving between services.
- Staff didn’t support people to manage risks associated with their health conditions, with no tailored risk mitigation plans in place for people requiring catheter care, enteral feeding tubes, or pressure or wound care.
- Leaders didn’t always model the culture and values of the service to their workforce. Although leaders said they were committed to providing a caring and supportive service, they didn’t demonstrate how they effectively managed the care provided.
- People and their families struggled to contact the service, as staff didn’t answer calls or return messages.
However:
- Some people said staff were caring and had built positive relationships with them where there were regular staff members.
- Staff felt supported in their role, and leaders made sure they were recruited safely by carrying out relevant pre-employment checks.