Updated 26 October 2019
The inspection
We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.
Inspection team
This inspection was carried out by one inspector.
Service and service type
Merit Care Ltd is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats.
The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.
Notice of inspection
We gave the service prior notice of the inspection. This was because it is a small service and we needed to be sure that the registered manager would be in the office to support the inspection.
Inspection activity started and ended on 30 September 2019 when we visited the office location.
What we did before inspection
We reviewed information we had received about the service. This information helps support our inspections. We used all of this information to plan our inspection.
The provider was not asked to complete a provider information return prior to this inspection. This is information we require providers to send us to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We took this into account when we inspected the service and made the judgements in this report.
During the inspection
We spoke with the registered manager and reviewed a range of records. This included three people’s care records and medication records. We looked at three staff files in relation to recruitment and staff supervision. A variety of records relating to the management of the service, including policies and procedures were reviewed.
After the inspection
We spoke with two people using the service, two relatives and three members of staff by telephone. We contacted three social care professionals to gain their views about the service but we were unable to gain any feedback. We continued to seek clarification from the provider to validate evidence found. We looked at training and quality assurance records. We spoke with two professionals who regularly visit the service.