Utmostcare Limited care company gets first CQC rating

Utmostcare Limited, an Aylesbury- based care company providing support to people in their own homes, was inspected for the first time by the health and social care watchdog Care Quality Commission (CQC) in September.

The service was rated ‘requires improvement’ overall, which is the second lowest rating given out by the regulator.

Utmostcare’s safety, effectiveness, responsiveness and quality of leadership were rated ‘requires improvement’, and level of caring was rated as ‘good’.

READ MORE: Police arrest suspected Amersham drink driver after smash

While people were “protected from the risk of abuse,” the CQC inspectors found that other risks to those using the service “were not clearly identified and managed.”

In assessing safety, the inspectors looked how infection was prevented and controlled around patients, and they found systems were not operated effectively to ensure appropriate infection control measures, which was in breach of health and social care regulations.

Some relatives felt staff’s approach to supporting people’s personal and domestic hygiene “could be improved,” the CQC said.

A relative reported: "The carers have the right protective clothing but, I've highlighted problems of hygiene, for example, they arrive and leave the house and do all the duties with the same gloves on."

Another relative commented: "As a family member, I had my way of doing things and it left a pleasant smell and [person] was clean, but the carers do things differently…They are just washing my [relative] with water and not using all the cleaning [products]."

A third relative said: “The carers wear the right protective clothing…I think however, the domestic skills are poor.”

READ MORE: Chiltern Toy Bank set to help record number of struggling parents

The inspectors found shortcomings with the safe management of medicines, including lack of appropriate record keeping of medicine administration, which was a breach of social care regulations.

The report said: “Some care plans contained insufficient information about people's medical conditions.

“One person's care plan did not include information about their significant illness.”

While systems were in place to document accidents and incidents, the completed accident forms were not “an accurate record of all incidents which had taken place,” the CQC found.

Risk assessment did not specify who was responsible for testing the smoke alarm or “consider factors such as nearest escape routes, or people’s ability to escape from a fire, such as for people cared for in bed,” the report said.

However, the service was found to be responsive to CQC’s feedback on identifying and managing risk.

One person using the service said: “I'm definitely safe with the carers at my home at the moment.”

The CQC found that people “were supported and treated with dignity and respect.”

A service user said: "The personality of the carers is very friendly, very approachable and very caring.”

However, a small number of people provided “less positive feedback,” the CQC said.

A relative commented: “They don't seem to be able to cook eggs for breakfast, toast can be half done. It seems to vary. They make drinks, but again it does vary…some say they can't use the stove, and others just do it. They try to take the food away before she has finished."

Another family member said “a cluster of carers” had been nice, friendly and talkative, but “ones we have now are a bit stern, hard and regimented. There is lack of compassion and empathy."

Utmostcare Limited was contacted for a comment.