Aylsham care service rated ‘inadequate’ after failing to report safeguarding incident
- Credit: Archant
An inadequate north Norfolk care service has been placed in special measures after inspectors found an incident resulting in a staff member's dismissal was not reported to the authorities.
A Care Quality Commission (CQC) report into the Aylsham-based service Smart Homecare stated: 'The provider told us about a safeguarding incident involving a member of staff and one person who used the service.
'They informed us that they dismissed the member of staff concerned but did not report this incident to the appropriate safeguarding team.'
Care providers are legally obligated to inform the CQC of safeguarding incidents, but the report states this incident was not reported to the commission, and that 'no staff had up to date safeguarding training' or knew to raise concerns with the CQC.
Administration manager Philip Avard said: 'We can't discuss individual cases.'
You may also want to watch:
He added that improvements were being made and said the service's report would look 'very different' in a few months time.
The report, published on Thursday, September 27, said Smart Homecare was 'not safe', 'not effective', and 'not well led'.
- 1 Why this Norfolk village is one of the best in the UK
- 2 Wartime spirit fills north Norfolk as 1940s weekend returns
- 3 End of an era as cafe owner hangs up apron after 26 years
- 4 Man airlifted to hospital with serious head injuries after fight near pub
- 5 Location revealed for new major music festival with '90s flavour'
- 6 'Proud to be a Cromer fisherman' - Tributes paid to Norfolk stalwart
- 7 Parts of Norfolk at risk of heavy downpours
- 8 Cromer: gang throw glass bottles at group near beach
- 9 Tribute shows planned in memory of Paul Eastwood
- 10 'I couldn't believe my eyes' - snorkeller finds 125-year-old shipwreck
It rated these areas as inadequate, and described the service's care and responsiveness as 'requiring improvement'.
The report said: 'People were not adequately safeguarded from abuse', and recruitment was 'not safe', with references not requested for one member of staff, as they were a family member.
The report also found staff were not adequately trained and 'did not receive supervision', and the service had 'no systems in place to monitor and assess safety'.
Two staff members had not had a DBS check since 2014.
But service users and relatives praised staff as 'brilliant' and 'kind' with inspectors calling staff 'warm and caring'.
Mr Avard said: 'It was our first report and they picked up on failings in our paperwork.
'We've taken it on board and made a number of improvements, and hired a consultant to help us.
'In a few months we'll have a very different report.'
He added: 'We're very lucky with staff. We've got a really good bunch and they're a credit to us.'
The announced inspection was carried out in July, and the service was given 48 hours notice.
The service received an overall rating of inadequate and will be reinspected within six months.