We conducted an inspection of Mercury Care Services Limited on 24 and 25 April 2018. At our previous inspection on 13 September 2017 we found the service was meeting the regulations inspected.

This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care for people living in their own houses and flats in the community. At the time of the inspection the service was supporting eight people. Not everyone using Mercury Care receives a 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 take into account any wider social care provided.

There was a registered manager at the service. 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.

Incidents were not always appropriately followed up to ensure that people were protected from avoidable harm. We identified two examples relating to one person receiving care that had not been properly followed up to ensure there was an effective risk management plan in place. Risk assessments were not always conducted to manage identified risks. We found two examples of identified risks that had not been properly explored through conducting risk assessments and having written risk management plans in place.

People’s medicines were not always managed safely. Care records did not include sufficient information about the medicines people were taking, the correct dose and other details care workers needed to assist people to take their medicines safely.

Quality monitoring systems did not ensure that issues were identified and remedied when needed.

People’s care records did not always contain sufficient information about their healthcare needs. We identified two examples within care records where people’s catheter care needs were not sufficiently explained. People’s nutritional needs were met.

Staff had a good understanding of their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). Care workers obtained consent before providing care and care records were signed by people using the service or their assigned Lasting Power of Attorney to demonstrate that they consented to their care.

People gave good feedback about their care workers and care workers demonstrated they understood people’s individual needs. People were supported to be as independent as they wanted to be and the provider supported people to access advocacy services when needed.

People were provided with dignified care and people told us they were treated with respect.

People told us they were involved in planning their care and care staff had a good understanding about people’s individual needs, but their care records sometimes lacked specific detail in what people’s requirements were.

Care records included information about people’s hobbies and past times and care workers were aware of these.

Care workers had received training in safeguarding people they supported from abuse and had a good understanding of the procedures in place.

The provider used safer recruitment procedures which helped ensure care workers were suitable to work with people. There were a sufficient number of suitable staff sent to assist people with their needs.

The provider had an appropriate complaints procedure in place and this was operated effectively.

Care staff were appropriately trained and received ongoing support to conduct their roles.

Care workers had a good understanding about infection control and had received appropriate training.

We found a breach of regulation in relation to safe care and treatment. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.

We conducted a comprehensive inspection of Mercury Care Services Limited on 14 and 16 February 2017. At this inspection we rated the provider good and did not find any breaches of regulations. We conducted a focussed inspection on 13 September 2017 in response to some information of concern that was received prior to the inspection. The information of concern was in relation to the timeliness of care visits, that care workers were not staying for the full length of their calls, the safe management of medicines, care workers right to work in the UK and managing people’s nutritional needs.

This report only covers our findings in relation to the information of concern. You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the 'all reports' link for Mercury Care Services Limited Centre on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

Mercury Care Services Limited is a domiciliary care agency delivering care to older people in their homes. At the time of the inspection the service was providing support to 13 people.

The service had a registered manager in place. 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.

Medicines care plans did not always contain enough information for care workers to refer to. However, there was sufficient information on people’s medicines administration charts to minimise the risk of error.

The provider conducted checks to ensure staff were eligible to work in the UK.

Care workers attended to people on time and stayed for the full length of their calls.

Care records contained sufficient information about people’s nutritional needs. However, there was very little information about people’s likes and dislikes in relation to food.

This inspection took place on 14 and 16 February 2017 and was announced.

Mercury Care Services Limited is a domiciliary care agency delivering care to older people in their homes. At the time of the inspection the service was providing support to 31 people.

The service had a registered manager in place. 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.

Staff knew how to recognise signs of abuse and knew what actions to take to protect people if they suspected abuse. Risk assessments identified avoidable harm and plans were implemented to mitigate risks. The provider used a robust recruitment process to ensure that staff were suitable and safe to work with people. Staff supported people to take their medicines in line with prescriber’s instructions and they used appropriate hygiene practices to reduce people’s risk of infection.

The staff delivering care and support to people were trained and supervised. Staff and the registered manager were understood their responsibility to provide support to people in line with the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 [MCA] People consented to the care they received and were provided with the level of support they required to eat and drink safely and sufficiently. People were supported to use healthcare services whenever they needed to.

People and their relatives told us that staff were respectful, polite and kind. The provider ensured a continuity of staff delivering care and support to promote positive relationships. People had their privacy protected and their independence promoted.

The service was responsive to people’s individual needs. People had care plans in place which directed staff as to how people’s assessed needs should be met. People knew how to make a complaint and were regularly invited to share their views about the service they were in receipt of.

Good governance was in evidence at the service. The roles and responsibilities of the leadership team, office staff and care staff were understood by all staff. Quality assurance monitoring was effective and on-going. The provider worked in partnership with other agencies to achieve best outcomes for people.