You are here

This service was previously registered at a different address - see old profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 28 October 2016

This inspection took place on the 29 September and 3 October 2016 and was announced.

English Rose Care Ltd. is registered to provide personal care and support for people living within their own homes. At the time of our inspection there were 24 people using the service, a majority of whom resided within Northamptonshire. People's packages of care varied dependent upon their needs, which included palliative and end of life care. There were 36 staff employed who provided people’s care.

The service had a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are 'registered persons'. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

This was our first inspection of the service since they registered with us.

People’s safety and welfare was promoted by staff that understood and had received training on their role in protecting people from potential harm and abuse. Safety and welfare was further promoted through the assessment and on-going review of potential risks to people. Where risks had been identified measures had been put into place to reduce their likelihood, which were recorded within people’s records and understood and implemented by staff.

Staff upon their recruitment had their application and references validated and were checked as to their suitability to work with people, which enabled the provider to make an informed decision as to their employment. Staff underwent a period of induction and training, which included their being introduced to people whose care and support they would provide. Training provided to staff and staff understanding of their role and responsibilities meant people were supported appropriately with all aspects of their care, which included support with their medicines.

People were in most instances supported by staff who they were familiar with. Staff understood people’s needs and were able to note any changes to their health and welfare. This enabled staff to liaise effectively with other professionals involved in the person’s care to bring about effective and timely care and support.

Staff understood the importance of seeking people’s consent prior to providing care and support. People spoke positively about the staff that supported them telling us staff sought their views about their care and how they wished their care to be provided. Staff were aware of people’s rights to make decisions and were able to tell us how they encouraged people to express their opinions on their care and support.

People we spoke with were complimentary about the approach of staff in the delivery of their care and support. They told us their privacy and dignity was understood and recognised by staff and that the approach and caring attitude of staff had a positive impact on them and their daily lives.

People or their family representatives were involved in the initial assessment of their needs. People’s needs were regularly reviewed, with their involvement and the support and care they required was detailed within care plans.

People spoke of the positive relationships they had developed with the provider and staff which had enabled them to comment on their care and support, which included their confidence to raise concerns or complaints. Where complaints had been made these had been investigated and the outcome shared with the complainant. We found the provider used information from concerns and complaints to make improvements to the service provided.

We found instances where the provider’s policies and procedures were not being fully implemented along with information within the statement of purpose that was not accurate. The provider told us they would take action to address the points raised.

People’s views were sought by the provider. The results of the provider’s first quality assurance questionnaire however had not been shared with people using the service. This was not consistent with information provided within the introductory letter to people when they commenced a service with English Rose Care Ltd. The provider took action following our inspection. We found the comments expressed within the questionnaires had been acted upon, which had included the employment of additional staff to work in the office to improve communication.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 28 October 2016

The service was safe.

People were protected from abuse because staff had an understanding of what abuse was and their responsibilities to act on concerns.

Risks to people's health and wellbeing had been assessed and measures were in place to ensure staff supported people safely.

There were sufficient numbers of staff available to keep people safe who had the appropriate skills and knowledge. Safe recruitment systems were followed to ensure staff were suitable to work with people who used the service.

People received support with their medicine which was managed safely.

Effective

Good

Updated 28 October 2016

The service was effective.

People were supported by staff who had the appropriate knowledge and skills to provide care and who understood the needs of people.

The provider and staff had an understanding of the Mental

Capacity Act 2005 and understood their role in promoting people’s rights and choices in all aspects of their care and support.

People were provided with support, where required, to meet their dietary requirements.

People were supported by staff who liaised effectively with health care professionals, to promote their health and welfare.

Caring

Good

Updated 28 October 2016

The service was caring.

People were supported by a consistent group of staff, who they had developed positive professional relationships with.

People or their representatives were involved in the development and reviewing of care plans, which recorded their views about their care.

People were supported by staff that were committed to the promotion of people's rights and who listened too and respected people’s wishes.

Responsive

Good

Updated 28 October 2016

The service was responsive.

People's needs were assessed prior to receiving a service and were regularly reviewed. Staff knew how to support people and took account of people's individual preferences in the delivery of care.

Concerns and complaints were recorded and used to develop and improve the service provided.

Well-led

Good

Updated 28 October 2016

The service was well-led.

Improvements were needed to ensure information produced by the provider was consistently followed and implemented.

The service had a registered manager.

The provider and staff had a clear view as to the service they wished to provide, which was the provision of good quality care to people in their own home.

The provider had a positive professional relationship with those who used the service, their family members and representatives, enabling and providing opportunities for them to comment on the service.