Archived: The J's Hospice

The service has a registered manager in post. 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.

The provider was given 48 hours’ notice of our visit. This was to ensure documentation and people we needed to talk to were accessible on the day of our inspection.

People were complimentary about the service they received from The J’s Hospice. People’s needs were assessed and appropriate information was given to people before the service commenced.

Staff had good knowledge of safeguarding procedures and were clear about the actions they would take to help protect people. Where safeguarding concerns had been identified the service had made the appropriate referrals and was open and transparent. Risk assessments had been completed to help staff to support people with everyday risks and help to keep them safe.

Systems were in place to assist people with the management of their medication and to help ensure people received their medication as prescribed. Recruitment checks had been carried out before staff started work to ensure that they were suitable to work in a care setting. Staff told us that they felt well supported to carry out their work and had received regular support and training.

There were sufficient numbers of staff, with the right competencies, skills and experience available to help meet the needs of the people who used the service.

Where needed people were supported to eat and drink sufficient amounts to help meet their nutritional needs and staff knew who to speak with if they had any concerns around people’s nutrition. People were supported by staff to maintain good healthcare and were assisted to gain access to healthcare providers where possible.

People had agreed to their care and been asked how they would like this provided. People said they had been treated with dignity and respect and that staff provided their care in a kind and caring manner.

The registered manager had a good understanding of Mental Capacity Act 2005 and who to approach if they had any concerns and the appropriate government body if people were not able to make decisions for themselves.

People knew how to make a complaint and the service had a clear complaints procedure in place. People had been provided with this information as part of the assessment process and it included information on the process and also any timespan for response. We saw that complaints had been appropriately investigated and recorded.

The service had an effective quality assurance system and had regular contact with people who used the service. People felt listened to and that their views and opinions had been sought. The quality assurance system was effective and improvements had been made as a result of learning from people’s views and opinions.

People told us they were treated with dignity and respect and they were involved in decisions about their care. We looked at five set of care records for people who used the service and saw that they provided the information necessary to provide safe and appropriate care according to their wishes.

We found appropriate systems and processes were in place to identify and safeguard people who used the service from abuse.

We found staff were well supported and had access to a good range of training and development opportunities. One staff member said, 'Coming to work here was the best decision I made.' People who used the service were also confident that staff were well trained and understood their needs.

There were appropriate mechanisms in place to assess and monitor the quality of the service provided.

We found that the staff team needed to work on the records that underpin the service they offered in order to ensure that the care provided was consistent but the team were aware of this and were already working towards improvements. We found that the staff were well trained and supported and the relatives of the people we spoke to agreed with this.

The agency had good feedback systems in place to enable people to comment on the service provided and we found that further quality assurance systems were being developed now that the agency had increased in size.