A home care provider that had one of its services shut down after failings were exposed in a TV documentary has had a second branch placed in special measures by the Care Quality Commission.
Sevacare was forced to close its Haringey branch in February after a joint investigation by Channel 4 and the Sunday Times newspaper found care workers had falsified log books and cut visits short.
The firm has now seen its Tower Hamlets branch placed in special measures after the watchdog found it had failed to sufficiently address concerns raised in an inspection in November last year.
When CQC inspectors visited the service in April they found staff were failing to carry out adequate risk assessments and mental capacity assessments, staff induction training was incomplete and service users faced late visits due to travel time for care staff not being factored in properly.
Inspectors found staff at the service were caring, but rated the service overall ‘inadequate’.
The service will see its registration removed if it fails to make improvements within six months.
‘Troubled service’
Debbie Ivanova, the CQC’s deputy chief inspector of adult social care in London, said: “Sevacare has made some improvement in the punctuality of home visits, however lateness was still identified as a significant problem by many people and their families.
“We have made it clear to Sevacare that it must improve or they could face further action to ensure that the people who rely on its services get the care to which they are entitled.”
Ravi Bains, chief executive of Sevacare, said: “We acknowledge that there were issues in this branch [Tower Hamlets] relating to the separately run Haringey contract, whose issues are well documented but operated from the same building.
“We are working closely with the local authority and the CQC in putting right the issues identified. Tower Hamlets council acknowledges that these contracts are separate and are aware of the improvements already made which are also ongoing.
“We hope upon our re-inspection in a few months’ time the hard work of the Tower Hamlets team will be recognised and we achieve the standards we know we can deliver.”
Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole 
Hampshire County Council 
Lincolnshire County Council 
Norfolk County Council 
Northamptonshire Children’s Trust 
South Gloucestershire Council 
Wiltshire Council 
Wokingham Borough Council 
Children and young people with SEND are ‘valued and prioritised’ in Wiltshire, find inspectors 
How specialist refugee teams benefit young people and social workers 
Podcast: returning to social work after becoming a first-time parent 
Podcast: would you work for an inadequate-rated service? 
Family help: one local authority’s experience of the model 
‘We are all one big family’: how one council has built a culture of support 
Workforce Insights – showcasing a selection of the sector’s top recruiters 
Facebook
X
LinkedIn
Instagram
If all homecare providers start closing, we will have to go back into hospital and then a care home. I don’t understand why they don’t care about their reputation. Any public service should be worried about how the public percieve them.
‘public service’??? Or private profit making provider? – profits first, standards second as usual
The whole concept is ridiculous and unmanageable The Councils have pushed this scheme as an alternative to placements in Care Homes and the Public have been promised quality care “at home”,this promise can not be kept, there is now way that this service goes anywhere near matching or even going remotely near replicating the 24/7/365 care given by the majority of Care Homes in the UK.
The reason given for perpetuating this farce is that the person needing care will loose their “independance” if they go in a Care Home ,well if one is in desperate need of good quality 24/7 Care surely they already are dependant on others are they not?
Many of the jobs these agencies do are contracted by local authorities. Why is it left to CQC expose their shortcomings and not the LA’s own commissioning and contract monitoring department? Surely the LAs don’t just commission the cheapest service and then leave service users to the wolves without further thought!?! My view is that the commissioners of these poor services should also be held to account.
Anonymous asks ‘I don’t understand why they (private companies) don’t care about their reputation’
Why should they care? They exist to make money. With a slick PR team and political support they can get away with anything. G4S messed up the Olympics and youth prisons- Who cares? Why would G4S give a monkeys? they are still making huge bucks. Just check their current share price- its blinking impressive!
I spoke to a ‘lovely bloke’ who once owned three care homes in my city- he openly admits that when he found an alternative venture- he shut them down without the slightest thought to those residents who lived there and made a tidy profit.