A care provider in south Manchester has been given an 'inadequate' rating by health care officials.
Manchester Prime Care, with offices based on Nell Lane in Chorlton, provides personal care, respite and domestic cleaning to people living in their own homes.
The Care Quality Commission (CQC) visited the provider in March and, in a report released on July 29, said 'clear systems and processes were not in place to help keep people safe'.
Regulators also found 'policies and procedures to guide staff in safeguarding people were out of date' and the provider had 'yet to access relevant training for staff'.
Despite this, staff were able to 'demonstrate their knowledge and understanding of the individual needs of people'.
When assessing safety monitoring, the watchdog said areas of potential risks ‘had not been appropriately accessed and planned for’.
While it was noted that staff had made individual and environmental assessments in order to reduce risks, they 'had not been kept under review to make sure information reflected people's current and changing needs'.
Ownership of the care provider changed in December, however the ‘legal entity’ remained the same since it opened in 2016.
Regulators expressed concern that care assessments implemented by the previous owners hadn’t been reviewed and amended by the new ownership.
"Medication administration records were not sufficiently detailed," the report outlined.
"For example, the administration of eye drops or use of topical creams were not adequately recorded.
Read more of today's stories here
"Confirmation from relevant health care professionals had not been sought to check arrangements for the use of thickeners and administering of 'crushed' medicines were correct so people were kept safe."
Regulators also said a programme of training, development and support 'had yet to be implemented' to ensure staff could effectively support people's needs.
“The majority of staff had been employed by the previous owner,” the report noted.
“The manager told us as they had no evidence of any previous training having been provided, therefore had 'made the assumption' it had not been completed.”
The principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) require that people are able to make their own decisions or, if not possible, the right decisions were made on their behalf.
"Systems did not demonstrate the provider was working within the principles of the MCA," the report acknowledged.
"Policies and procedures needed reviewing and updating, along with training for staff."
While staff 'could not recall receiving training in this area', regulators noted they were able to explain how they supported people to make day-to-day choices.
“Staff understood their role and were knowledgeable and respectful about people's individual needs and background,” the report added.
“One staff member spoke about the coordinated support for one person, so their culture needs were met.”
Records also showed people and their families had been consulted with and were involved in decisions regarding their care and dietary requirements.
However, these records ‘had yet to be reviewed' since the new owners had taken over. This was found to be in breach of Regulation 17 of the Health and Social Care Act.
Regulators also expressed concerns regarding staff recruitment processes.
"The provider had not satisfied themselves employment checks had been carried out for staff employed by the previous owner,” the report said.
“Furthermore, a newly employed care worker and the manager had commenced employment without an up to date DBS check and written references to evidence their suitability for the position applied for."
When assessed for how well-led the service was, regulators graded the provided as 'inadequate' due to a number of failed regulatory requirements.
The manager, who was new to the post, was not registered with CQC while 'procedures and processes did not clearly outline the role and expectations of the service'.
However, regulators were informed by staff that they felt improvements were being made since the new ownership.
After the CQC visit, the owners sent a 12-month business improvement plan and were implementing a new electronic records system that would help provide clear management.
“The manager told us the management team were currently focusing on the recruitment of staff and training needs so the service could provide more flexibility in support,” the report added.
Following the inspection, regulators have instructed the care provider to update assessments, systems and records, provide staff with necessary training and ensure a 'sufficiently robust' recruitment process.
Due to its ‘inadequate’ rating, regulators will visit the care provider again in six months to check for significant improvements.
Manchester Prime Care declined to comment when contacted by the Manchester Evening News.
