We carried out a review of the data available to us about Moore Care Limited on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Moore Care Limited, you can give feedback on this service.
People’s experience of using this service:
The outcomes for people using the service reflected principles and values of Registering the Right Support. The staff promoted choice and control including people having ownership of their care plans and deciding on their own care. Independence and inclusion were important aspects of people’s lives as they participated in work, leisure and creative opportunities. There was a focus on learning new skills and people spoke with us about their aims for more independent living in the future.
People continued to receive safe care. There were enough staff to support them and they were recruited to ensure that they were safe to work with people. People were protected from the risk of harm and received their prescribed medicines safely. Lessons were learnt from when mistakes happened.
The care that people received continued to be effective. They were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. Staff received training and support to be able to care for people well. They ensured that people were supported to maintain good health and nutrition; including partnerships with other organisations when needed. The environment was adapted to meet people’s needs.
People continued to have positive relationships with the staff who were caring and treated people with respect and kindness. They were able to get involved in activities and pursue their interests. Staff knew them well and understood how to care for them in a personalised way. There were plans in place which detailed people’s likes and dislikes and these were regularly reviewed. People knew how to raise a concern or make a complaint.
The registered manager was approachable and there were systems in place which encouraged people to give their feedback. There were quality structures in place which were effective in continually developing the quality of the care that was provided to them.
Rating at last inspection: They were last inspected on 26 May 2016 and were rated good.
Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on previous rating.
Follow up: We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received we may inspect sooner.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
We carried out this inspection at the provider’s office on 26 May 2016. The provider was given 48 hours’ notice because the location provides a domiciliary care service and we wanted to make sure the manager was available. In addition, we also carried out visits to people using the service on 26 and 31 May 2016.
The service is required to have a registered manager and at the time of our inspection, there was one in post. 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.
The service was person focused and accounted for personal likes, dislikes, needs and preferences.
People were cared for and supported by staff who had demonstrated their suitability for their role. Recruitment procedures were safe and included Disclosure and Barring service (DBS) checks. Staff understood their role and responsibilities in keeping people safe and how to report any concerns they may have.
People who were able to were supported by staff to manage their own medicines. Medicines were safely stored, administered and disposed of and in accordance with current guidance.
The principles and requirements of the Mental Capacity Act (2005) were being met. When required, best interest decisions and capacity assessments had been completed. People were supported by staff who knew them well. Staff were aware of promoting people’s safety, whilst providing information to support people to make day-to-day decisions.
The provider ensured training was arranged and staff felt they were supported to ensure people received care to meet their needs.
Staff were kind, caring and compassionate. Staff promoted people’s dignity and privacy and supported people with decision-making.
Effective auditing systems were in place to assess and monitor the quality of the service. People living at the service were sent questionnaires and asked for their opinions and views about the service they received. Staff were invited to voice their opinions about how to improve the service; managers provided feedback to staff about their suggestions.
People were encouraged to speak up should they have any worries or concerns. People knew the provider and the registered manager and felt able to discuss any concerns they had. People felt the provider supported them to be involved in the service development.
Below is a summary of what we found. If you want to see the evidence supporting our summary please read the full report.
Is the service safe?
On the day of the inspection three people who used the service showed us their care files. All three people showed us where they had signed to say they agreed with their care plan and with their photograph being kept on file. One person told us they had control over their life and they made choices that were respected by staff. Another person told us, 'My likes and preferences have been respected'. Another person told us they were involved in writing their care plan and explained to us why their care plan and risk assessments kept them safe.
Is the service effective?
Staff also told us that communication between staff members worked well. One member of staff we spoke with told us they found staff meetings useful. We read minutes of a recent staff meeting and found staff had been able to discuss how they could support each other to work as a team. They also told us they felt supported because changes or updates to people's care were communicated well. They told us that updates were shared with staff by using the internal computer network at the service. This meant that staff were supported to deliver safe and appropriate care to people supported by the service.
Is the service caring?
We saw staff supporting people with warmth and kindness. People we spoke with who used the service told us they were happy living there. One person said, 'Staff have helped me come along way. I want other people to have the same chance as I've had to change their lives.' Another person told us staff helped them plan exciting activities. They said, 'Staff look after me very well, they are amazing.'
Is the service responsive?
Care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure people's safety. People who used the service told us staff understood their needs. One person said, 'Staff keep on top of how my needs change, they notice if I'm anxious.' When we looked at people's care records we found that people's individual needs had been assessed and supported with care plans and risk assessments. We found that these had been regularly reviewed and updated.
Is the service well-led?
The provider had an effective system in place to identify, assess and manage risks to the health, safety and welfare of people using the service and others. We found monthly audits had been completed by managers at the service. This included replenishing first aid boxes, checking that risk assessments were up to date and that fire checks had been completed. We spoke to staff that were responsible for completing the audits. They told us the audits helped them keep the service effective
We spoke briefly with one person who lived at the service. They said they were happy living there, and said: 'I've got a nice bedroom, and I've got everything I need. The staff help me, and they help me to be independent.'
We spoke with the registered manager and one member of staff who both spoke positively about the service. The staff member said that there was an emphasis on independence and people living at Manchester Road were encouraged to participate in activities and be a part of the community as much as possible.
During our visit we checked the staff rota and saw that there were sufficient numbers of staff to meet people's needs and keep them safe. We found that people received care and support that protected their rights and met their needs from staff that were properly trained and supported.
People expressed their views and were involved in making decisions about their care and treatment. Regular house meetings were held which involved people and staff, people were given the opportunity and encouragement to voice their opinions about activities and events and their care.
We spoke with three people and everyone we spoke with told us they did lots of activities. One person told us they had a job and enjoyed this and meeting new people. Another person we spoke with said, 'I like it here, it's a nice place and staff are very caring with us'.
There were effective recruitment and selection processes in place. Staff had completed an induction programme prior to starting work in the home and this involved shadowing more experienced members of staff.