Forget Me Not Homecare Services Ltd received an overall Good rating across both inspected key questions (Safe and Well-led), with people and relatives reporting safe, respectful and person-centred care. The only minor shortcoming noted was that some service improvement actions were not consistently documented.
Concerns (1)
minorGovernance: “Some actions were being taken to further develop the service however these were not always documented.”
Strengths
· People and relatives reported feeling safe and happy with the care provided, with no missed calls and staff never rushing people
· Safe recruitment practices were followed and staffing levels were managed well with effective cover for unexpected absences
· Staff attended medicines administration training with regular competency checks and medicine audits completed
· Regular audits and quarterly quality monitoring reviews with clear actions and outcomes documented
· Provider demonstrated awareness of MCA, LPA, and duty of candour responsibilities
Quality-Statement breakdown (12)
safe: Systems and processes to safeguard people from the risk of abuseGood
safe: Assessing risk, safety monitoring and managementGood
safe: Staffing and recruitmentGood
safe: Using medicines safelyGood
safe: Preventing and controlling infectionGood
safe: Learning lessons when things go wrongGood
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: Managers and staff being clear about their roles, and understanding quality performance, risks and regulatory requirementsGood
well-led: Engaging and involving people using the service, the public and staffGood
well-led: Continuous learning and improving careGood
Forget Me Not Homecare Services Ltd received a Good rating across all five key questions at its first inspection in July 2019, with people praising compassionate, consistent staff and a no-missed-calls record since registration. Minor areas for development included formalising the care planning process and introducing a structured improvement plan, but neither impacted the quality of care at the time of inspection.
Concerns (3)
minorCare planning: “The registered manager had identified that the current care planning process didn't support the identification and robust assessment of risks in a way they were happy with.”
minorGovernance: “There was no formal plan as to how and when developments would be introduced but the quality of the care people currently received had not been impacted because of this.”
minorSupervision / appraisal: “As the service had not been open a year staff had not yet had an annual appraisal.”
Strengths
· People felt 100% safe and staff knew them very well, providing highly individualised care
· No missed calls since the service began; agency staff had never been used
· Staff described as well trained, well supported, and compassionate by people and relatives
· Strong safeguarding awareness; staff confident in reporting concerns
· Safe medicines management with monthly audits, competency checks, and protocols for 'as required' medicines
Quality-Statement breakdown (24)
safe: Systems and processes to safeguard people from the risk of abuseGood
safe: Assessing risk, safety monitoring and managementGood
safe: Staffing and recruitmentGood
safe: Using medicines safelyGood
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; supporting people to live healthier lives and access healthcareGood
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
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 preferencesGood
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 supportGood
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: Managers and staff being clear about their roles, quality performance, risks and regulatory requirements; continuous learningGood
well-led: Engaging and involving people using the service, the public and staffGood