Fareham's Infinite Care agency that looks after dozens of pensioners is branded 'inadequate' by CQC over failings in safety

Monitors from the Care Quality Commission (CQC) inspected Infinite Care agency based in Cams Hall, Cams Hill, where it found misgivings in how the staff cared for the 23 pensioners on its books.

Health officials branded Infinite as inadequate in all areas it inspected, criticising its safety record, leadership and effectiveness.

In its report the CQC said: ‘People told us they felt safe. However, we found significant concerns in safety and the management of the service which demonstrated people were not receiving safe care.’

Inspectors said information about risks in people’s care plans was not always effective and ‘placed people at risk of harm’.

Questions were also raised about written information detailing how people should be supported safely.

Inspectors found this was not completed or had ‘important missing information’.

Infinite also ‘failed to protect people from abuse’ and to take action when abuse was suspected, the CQC said.

In its report, inspectors warned: ‘The provider had a “safeguarding service users from abuse or harm” policy in place. However, this policy had not been followed.

‘For example, in December 2021 a care worker raised concerns with the registered manager about one of these allegations of abuse.

‘Despite these concerns being raised with the management team, a safeguarding referral was not made to the local authority and this was not reported to Care Quality Commission (CQC), as required.

‘This meant this person and others continued to be at risk of harm.’

SEE ALSO: Crisis at QA hospital and with ambulance service deepens

People were at risk of harm due to ‘poor medicines management’, the report continued.

There was a lack of information to ensure staff understood when to give medicines which were prescribed ‘as and when required’.

‘We could not be sure people received their medicines safely, as prescribed or by staff that had been sufficiently trained to do so,’ the report said.

The service was not well led, monitors concluded.

The CQC said there was a ‘lack of provider oversight and quality monitoring to identify and address risks to people’.

‘Auditing was not robust where concerns were raised at previous inspections,’ the CQC said. ‘The provider failed to take action to sustain improvements.’