Dignity Direct Homecare Limited

“Not everyone who used the service received personal care. In this service, the Care Quality Commission can only inspect the service received by people who get support with personal care. This includes help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where people receive such support, we also consider any wider social care provided.”

“During our previous in September 2024, we found the provider was in breach of six regulations in relation to safe care and treatment, effective staffing, person centred care, need for consent, good governance and fit and proper persons employed. As a result, we served warning notices (WN) for regulation 17 (Good governance) regulation 12 (Safe care and treatment) and for regulation 18 (Staffing). We further issued requirement notices for regulation 11 (Need for consent) and regulation 9 (Person-centred care).”

“At this assessment, we found the provider failed to make improvements and remained in repeat breaches of regulation 9 (Person-centred care), regulation 11 (Need for consent), and they failed to meet the WNs for regulation 18 (Staffing) and regulation 17 (Good governance). This meant people continued to remain at risk of receiving unsafe care and treatment and support. In addition, we found the provider was in breach of regulation 10 (Dignity and respect). CQC have decided to take enforcement action against the provider, we will publish this information on our website after any representations and/or appeals have been concluded.”

“The provider did not always work well with people to understand what being safe meant to them and how to achieve that. People were not supported by skilled and effectively deployed care workers. People received their medicines as prescribed. However, care worker’s understanding of medicine to be given as needed (PRN) protocols was poor. The provider did not always work within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005. People were not always treated with kindness and respect. Care workers had received training on equality, diversity, privacy, and dignity but it was not always effective. The provider did not always ensure people’s care and support met people’s preferences. The provider did not always make sure people were at the centre of their care and had not valued diversity in their workforce. The provider did not have an effective oversight of the service.”

“People were protected from the risk of infection. Risk assessments and risk management plans were completed for people which included guidance for care workers. The provider carried out satisfactory background checks for all care workers before they started working. Senior staff assessed people’s needs to ensure these could be met. Care workers gave people as much choice as possible.”

“This service is being placed in special measures. The purpose of special measures is to ensure that services providing inadequate care make significant improvements. Special measures provide a framework within which we use our enforcement powers in response to inadequate care and provide a timeframe within which providers must improve the quality of the care they provide.”