# Best Care 4 U Stanmore

*Operated by Best Care 4 U Ltd.*

Best Care 4 U Stanmore is a CQC-regulated home-care agency in Stanmore.

## CQC Ratings

| Key question | Rating |
| --- | --- |
| Overall | Good |
| Safe | Good |
| Effective | Good |
| Caring | Good |
| Responsive | Good |
| Well-led | Good |

Rating published: 23/11/2018

## Practical info

- Postcode: HA7 1JS
- Registered manager: Simpson, Patricia
- Local authority: Harrow
- Region: London
- City: Stanmore
- Last CQC check: 23/Nov/2018 - 00:00

## Inspection findings

### Other

- Finding
  - Evidence: Accidents and incidents recorded and analysed to prevent recurrence
  - Published: 2021-10-30
- Finding
  - Evidence: Effective complaints procedure in place with no complaints received since last inspection
  - Published: 2021-10-30
- Finding
  - Evidence: Robust safer recruitment checks including enhanced DBS, identity verification and two written references
  - Published: 2021-10-30
- Finding
  - Evidence: Monthly staff spot checks and round visits carried out and documented by management
  - Published: 2021-10-30
- Finding
  - Evidence: Quarterly reviews with people and relatives to assess and monitor changing needs
  - Published: 2021-10-30
- Finding
  - Evidence: Care plans were individualised and included mental capacity, consent, health needs, likes and dislikes
  - Published: 2021-10-30
- Finding
  - Evidence: Regular supervision sessions and annual appraisals were in place for all staff
  - Published: 2021-10-30
- Finding
  - Evidence: Staff received relevant training including moving and handling, safeguarding, dementia awareness, first aid and health and safety
  - Published: 2021-10-30
- Finding
  - Evidence: People and relatives expressed high satisfaction with care quality and consistency of care workers
  - Published: 2021-10-30
- **record_keeping** _(minor)_
  - Evidence: we did not see evidence that the service analysed the information obtained from satisfaction surveys. The provider explained that they reviewed the satisfaction surveys but this was not documented.
  - Published: 2021-10-30
- **safeguarding** _(moderate)_
  - Evidence: the majority of staff we spoke with failed to explain that they could report their concerns to local authority or the CQC
  - Published: 2021-10-30
- **medication_management** _(critical)_
  - Evidence: there were gaps in some of the MARs we viewed...The service did not have an effective medicine audit in place.
  - Published: 2021-10-30
- **care_planning** _(critical)_
  - Evidence: some areas of potential risks to people had not been identified and included in the risk assessments. This could result in people receiving unsafe care
  - Published: 2021-10-30
- Finding
  - Evidence: The service did not provide visits of less than two hours, supporting unhurried, person-centred care.
  - Published: 2021-10-30
- Finding
  - Evidence: Staff spoke positively about management, describing an open, transparent and supportive culture.
  - Published: 2021-10-30
- Finding
  - Evidence: A comprehensive quality assurance system including monthly audits, spot checks, round visits and satisfaction surveys was in place.
  - Published: 2021-10-30
- Finding
  - Evidence: Care plans were person-centred, detailed and regularly reviewed with the involvement of people and relatives.
  - Published: 2021-10-30
- Finding
  - Evidence: Staff received regular supervision, spot checks, annual appraisals and a broad training programme including the Care Certificate.
  - Published: 2021-10-30
- Finding
  - Evidence: Robust safer recruitment processes including enhanced DBS checks, identity verification and written references.
  - Published: 2021-10-30
- Finding
  - Evidence: People experienced consistency of care staff and had no concerns about punctuality or attendance.
  - Published: 2021-10-30
- Finding
  - Evidence: Medicines administration records were fully completed with no gaps, and a monthly auditing system was in place.
  - Published: 2021-10-30
- Finding
  - Evidence: Comprehensive and personalised risk assessments were in place, reviewed and updated when people's conditions changed.
  - Published: 2021-10-30
- Finding
  - Evidence: People and relatives consistently reported feeling safe and satisfied with the care provided, with no complaints raised since the last inspection.
  - Published: 2021-10-30
- Finding
  - Evidence: Service demonstrated sufficient action to meet Regulation 12 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008
  - Published: 2020-01-29
- Finding
  - Evidence: Care plans now include clear instructions for completing MARs
  - Published: 2020-01-29
- Finding
  - Evidence: Monthly medicines audit introduced since previous inspection to assess and monitor medicines management
  - Published: 2020-01-29
- Finding
  - Evidence: MARs completed with no unexplained gaps following refresher training for all care support staff
  - Published: 2020-01-29
- Finding
  - Evidence: Risk assessments reviewed and improved to include comprehensive detail about people's home environment and overall health
  - Published: 2020-01-29
- **care_planning** _(critical)_
  - Evidence: some risk assessments contained limited information and some areas of potential risks to people had not been identified and included
  - Published: 2020-01-29

### safe

- Finding
  - Risk assessments and medicines management
  - Published: 2020-01-29

## Source

Data published by the [Care Quality Commission](https://www.cqc.org.uk/) under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Canonical page: https://homecarecompass.co.uk/agency/1-697801232

HomeCare Compass is an independent guide and is not affiliated with the CQC.