Medinova Healthcare Ltd is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats. Date of assessment: 12 November to 18 November 2024. We carried out this assessment to follow up on breaches of regulation we identified at the last inspection. The last rating for the service was requires improvement (published 15 April 2023). At the last inspection, we identified breaches relating to person-centred care, need for consent, safe care and treatment, good governance and staffing. At this assessment we found the provider remained in breach of regulations relating to person-centred care, safe care and treatment, good governance and staffing. We identified new concerns relating to fit and proper persons employed. Records were not always maintained, and systems were not always operated effectively. This meant that there was an increased risk of harm. For example, medicines and risks were not always managed in a safe way. The provider’s recruitment systems and staff training were not always robust. The provider’s systems for monitoring the service needed to be improved. However, people were happy with the care they received. Staff felt well supported and were happy working for the agency.
PDF cached but not yet analysed by Claude; set ANTHROPIC_API_KEY and re-run npm run etl:reports -- --location 1-12568187321.
Medinova Healthcare Ltd, a small domiciliary care agency in Hounslow, was rated Requires Improvement overall at its first inspection in March 2023, with breaches identified across five regulations covering person-centred care, consent, safe care and treatment, governance, and staffing. Key failures included incomplete mandatory training for care workers, poor risk management planning, medicines not managed in line with national guidance, and care plans lacking sufficient person-centred detail, though the service was rated Good for caring.
Concerns (10)
criticalCare planning: “Care plans did not always provide enough detail about people's individual needs or how they wanted their care provided.”
criticalMedication management: “Care workers were not recording their involvement in the administration of the prescribed medicines for this person.”
criticalStaff training: “3 had not completed moving and handling training, 1 had not undertaken health and safety training and 2 had not completed infection control training.”
criticalStaff competency: “The provider could not demonstrate that the care workers' competency in managing and administering medicines had been assessed.”
criticalConsent / capacity: “The registered manager had not undertaken a mental capacity assessment to confirm if the person could consent.”
criticalGovernance: “The quality assurance process developed by the provider to review care plans did not enable them to identify where additional information was required.”
moderatePerson-centred care: “Care plans were not written in a person-centred manner which identified the person's wishes in relation to how they wanted their care provided.”
moderateRecord keeping: “The registered manager explained they had regular contact with people...but these discussions were not recorded.”
moderateInfection control: “The COVID-19 risk assessments did not consider all the risk factors associated with COVID-19 such as ethnicity and age.”
minorEnd-of-life care: “The provider told us a person's end of life wishes was not discussed with them or their relatives during the initial needs assessment.”
Strengths
· The provider had a safe recruitment process including two references, right to work checks, and DBS checks for all four care workers.
· Relatives confirmed care workers arrived on time, stayed for the agreed length of time, and treated people with dignity and respect.
· Care workers wore PPE during visits, confirmed by relatives.
· People were involved in the development of their care plans, with relatives confirming their participation.
· Care workers spoke the same languages as the people they supported, facilitating communication.
Quality-Statement breakdown (22)
safe: Assessing risk, safety monitoring and managementRequires improvement
safe: Using medicines safelyRequires improvement
safe: Preventing and controlling infectionRequires improvement
safe: Systems and processes to safeguard people from the risk of abuseGood
safe: Staffing and recruitmentGood
safe: Learning lessons when things go wrongNot rated
effective: Staff support: induction, training, skills and experienceRequires improvement
effective: Ensuring consent to care and treatment in line with law and guidanceRequires improvement
effective: Assessing people's needs and choices; delivering care in line with standards, guidance and the lawGood
effective: Supporting people to eat and drink enough to maintain a balanced dietGood
effective: Supporting people to live healthier lives, access healthcare services and supportGood
caring: Ensuring people are well treated and supported; respecting equality and diversityGood
caring: Supporting people to express their views and be involved in making decisions about their careGood
caring: Respecting and promoting people's privacy, dignity and independenceGood
responsive: Planning personalised care to ensure people have choice and control and to meet their needs and preferencesRequires improvement
responsive: End of life care and supportRequires improvement
responsive: Meeting people's communication needsGood
responsive: Improving care quality in response to complaints or concernsGood
well-led: Continuous learning and improving careRequires improvement
well-led: Promoting a positive culture that is person-centred, open, inclusive and empoweringGood
well-led: How the provider understands and acts on the duty of candourGood
well-led: Working in partnership with othersRequires improvement