Delta Care - Trafford improved from Requires Improvement to Good overall at its May 2023 inspection, with safe, effective and responsive domains all rated Good. Well-led remained Requires Improvement due to insufficiently robust governance audits, a gap in the registered manager post, and formal service user feedback last collected in 2021.
Concerns (5)
moderateMedication management: “Staff had not queried a change in a person's medication and were not always using the appropriate codes when administering medicines.”
moderateGovernance: “The call monitoring audit summary was always the same. Medication audits had not always been acted upon by office staff to verify these had been administered correctly.”
moderateLeadership: “At the time of our inspection there was not a registered manager in post. The manager had submitted an application to register.”
minorRecord keeping: “Not all staff were making full use of electronic notes as reasons for why call visits were cut short were not always recorded.”
minorPerson-centred care: “The service had last sought formal feedback from people in 2021. Only 2 people we spoke with could recall completing a feedback form.”
Strengths
· People felt safe and reported no missed care visits; staffing levels were appropriate and recruitment processes were robust including regular DBS checks.
· Staff completed thorough inductions with shadowing, and received spot checks, supervisions and appraisals to maintain competency.
· Staff had good relationships with health professionals including district nurses, social workers and GPs to support people's health outcomes.
· People received personalised, person-centred care in line with their preferences, including choice of carer gender and tailored communication supports.
· Complaints were handled effectively and people reported satisfaction with responses to concerns.
Quality-Statement breakdown (22)
safe: Using medicines safelyGood
safe: Assessing risk, safety monitoring and managementGood
safe: Staffing and recruitmentGood
safe: Systems and processes to safeguard people from the risk of abuseGood
safe: Preventing and controlling infectionGood
safe: Learning lessons when things go wrongGood
effective: Assessing people's needs and choices; delivering care in line with standards, guidance and the lawGood
effective: Staff support: induction, training, skills and experienceGood
effective: Supporting people to eat and drink enough to maintain a balanced dietGood
effective: Staff working with other agencies to provide consistent, effective, timely careGood
effective: Ensuring consent to care and treatment in line with law and guidanceGood
responsive: Planning personalised care to ensure people have choice and controlGood
responsive: Meeting people's communication needsGood
responsive: Supporting people to develop and maintain relationships to avoid social isolationGood
responsive: Improving care quality in response to complaints or concernsGood
responsive: End of life care and supportNot rated
well-led: Managers and staff being clear about their roles, and understanding quality performance, risks and regulatory requirementsRequires improvement
well-led: Promoting a positive culture that is person-centred, open, inclusive and empoweringGood
well-led: Engaging and involving people using the service, the public and staffRequires improvement
well-led: How the provider understands and acts on the duty of candourGood
well-led: Continuous learning and improving careRequires improvement
Delta Care – Trafford, a domiciliary care agency serving 58 adults, was rated Inadequate overall on its first inspection, with warning notices issued for breaches of Regulations 9, 12 and 17, and placed into special measures. Pervasive failures included chronic late and missed visits, unsafe medicines administration, poor staff continuity, ineffective governance, and a systemic lack of communication with people using the service and their families.
Concerns (12)
criticalMissed or late visits: “People and relatives told us staff did not always attend the planned call for care and support at the agreed time and some calls could be an hour early or two hours late.”
criticalMedication management: “People were not receiving some of their medicines at appropriate intervals due to the calls being early or late... missed signatures which meant we could not be assured people had received their medicines as prescribed.”
criticalSafeguarding: “Two people told us, staff had let themselves in via the key safe and wandered around their property without permission. A third person told us, a staff member arrived one evening with a 'friend'.”
criticalGovernance: “Audits to monitor and improve the service had not highlighted the concerns with late and early calls and that staff were not staying the allocated time of the visit.”
criticalPerson-centred care: “For one person, for 69 visits from 124, they did not receive an adequate allocation of support from the visiting staff member.”
criticalLeadership: “No action had been taken to ensure people received personal care and support from staff in a timely manner... Systems to manage the quality of the service were ineffective.”
moderateCare planning: “We saw for two people, their needs had changed, and the paper care plan no longer reflected this. We reviewed the information on the app, and the information did not reflect current needs.”
moderateCommunication with families: “People overwhelmingly told us, they had to ring the office and find out why their call was late and sometimes there was no response.”
moderateComplaints handling: “People did not always know who to raise a complaint with or did not complain as they did not want to get staff into trouble.”
moderateInfection control: “We observed a staff member administer medicines, serve food and then assist with redressing a person wearing the same gloves.”
moderateRecord keeping: “Staff were not always logging in and out of calls. For one person who had received 124 calls over October 2019, the call had not been logged on 24 occasions.”
minorStaff training: “Some staff told us there was a lack of training around pressure care which included how to put on compression stockings or specialist footwear.”
Strengths
· Staff received training to administer medicines and were competency checked before supporting people with medicines.
· Staff received appropriate pre-employment checks prior to commencing employment.
· Risk assessments for people's properties were robust to ensure safety for person and staff.
· Accidents and incidents were recorded and analysed to prevent future occurrences.
· People received appropriate assessments of their capacity in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005.
Quality-Statement breakdown (15)
safe: Using medicines safelyInadequate
safe: Staffing and recruitmentInadequate
safe: Systems and processes to safeguard people from the risk of abuseInadequate
safe: Assessing risk, safety monitoring and managementRequires improvement
safe: Preventing and controlling infectionRequires improvement
effective: Supporting people to eat and drink enough to maintain a balanced dietRequires improvement
effective: Staff support: induction, training, skills and experienceRequires improvement
effective: Ensuring consent to care and treatment in line with law and guidance
Delta Care – Trafford demonstrated substantial improvement since its previous Inadequate rating, exiting Special Measures with no remaining regulatory breaches across Safe, Caring, and Well-led domains. Residual gaps in recruitment record-keeping and an out-of-date care plan/audit process kept the overall and two key question ratings at Requires Improvement.
Concerns (3)
moderateRecord keeping: “two of the three staff recruitment files we viewed, did not contain the applicant's full employment history and any gaps in employment had not been explored. Three of the files did not have health declarations.”
moderateGovernance: “one of the care plans and accompanying risk assessment we reviewed was out of date. The registered manager had completed both the care plan and the audits of the care plans.”
minorCare planning: “One risk assessment was out of date. The risk issue identified was no longer current and the care plan needed to reflect this.”
Strengths
· Significant improvements in medication administration since previous inspection; medicines now given at correct times with updated smartphone app and staff competency checks.
· Visit punctuality improved markedly; staff have designated geographical areas and a live monitoring system flags shortfalls immediately.
· People now receive support from regular carers, improving consistency and feelings of safety.
· Monthly surveys introduced post-inspection with overwhelmingly positive feedback and rapid response to any concerns.
· Staff feel valued and supported; registered manager fosters open, honest culture and praises staff regularly.
Quality-Statement breakdown (13)
safe: Using medicines safelyGood
safe: Staffing and recruitmentRequires improvement
safe: Systems and processes to safeguard people from the risk of abuseGood
safe: Assessing risk, safety monitoring and managementRequires improvement
safe: Preventing and controlling infectionGood
safe: Learning lessons when things go wrongGood
caring: Ensuring people are well treated and supported; respecting equality and diversity; privacy, dignity and independenceGood
caring: Supporting people to express their views and be involved in making decisions about their care
Good
caring: Ensuring people are well treated and supported; respecting equality and diversityRequires improvement
caring: Supporting people to express their views and be involved in making decisions about their careRequires improvement
responsive: Planning personalised care to ensure people have choice and controlRequires improvement
responsive: Improving care quality in response to complaints or concernsRequires improvement
well-led: Managers and staff being clear about their roles, and understanding quality performance, risks and regulatory requirementsInadequate
well-led: Promoting a positive culture that is person-centred, open, inclusive and empoweringInadequate
well-led: Continuous learning and improving careInadequate
Good
well-led: Managers and staff being clear about their roles, and understanding quality performance, risks and regulatory requirementsRequires improvement
well-led: Promoting a positive culture that is person-centred, open, inclusive and empoweringGood
well-led: Engaging and involving people, the public and staff; continuous learning and improving careGood
well-led: How the provider understands and acts on the duty of candourGood