Wolverhampton Home Care Service Placed into Special Measures by CQC

A Wolverhampton domiciliary care provider has been placed into special measures after the Care Quality Commission (CQC) rated the service as inadequate following an inspection completed in May.

Geocare Services Limited, which provides personal care to people living with dementia, physical disabilities and sensory impairments, was supporting 59 people at the time of the inspection.

The inspection followed a previous visit where the provider received three warning notices after breaching regulations relating to safe care and treatment, consent, complaints and governance. Inspectors found that three of those regulatory breaches remained, relating to safe care and treatment, consent, and good governance.

Following the inspection, CQC rated the service:

• Safe – Inadequate
• Effective – Inadequate (downgraded from Requires Improvement)
• Caring – Requires Improvement
• Responsive – Requires Improvement
• Well-led – Inadequate

As a result, the service has been placed into special measures, meaning it will be subject to increased regulatory oversight while improvements are made. The CQC has also begun regulatory action, which the provider has the right to appeal.

Inspectors found a number of concerns affecting the quality and safety of care.

People described staff as kind and respectful but reported inconsistent visit times, delays, poor continuity of care and difficulties contacting managers when problems arose. Inspectors said this affected people’s confidence in the reliability of the service and made it harder to maintain daily routines.

The inspection also found that records did not demonstrate that consent was consistently obtained or managed in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Where people may have lacked capacity, there was no evidence that mental capacity assessments or best interest decisions had been completed.

Care planning was also found to be inconsistent. Some care plans did not accurately reflect people’s current needs or provide staff with sufficient guidance. In one case, records identified the need for continence equipment, but staff had no documented instructions on how to support the individual safely.

Additional concerns identified by inspectors included:

• Staff had not always completed training relevant to people’s assessed needs, including oxygen management.
• Safety concerns raised by partner organisations were not always acted upon effectively.
• Risks relating to people’s healthcare needs were not consistently assessed or managed.
• Medicines were not always administered safely, including failures to give time-critical medication as prescribed.
• Governance systems did not effectively identify problems or embed learning and improvement.
• Leadership was found to lack the skills, knowledge and oversight needed to run the service effectively.

Despite these concerns, inspectors noted that many people spoke positively about frontline staff and said they generally felt safe and believed their health and wellbeing needs were being supported.

The CQC said it will continue to monitor the service closely and return to assess whether the required improvements have been made.

Stay informed with the stories shaping health and social care.