You are here

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

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 14 February 2017

The inspection took place on 19 January 2017 and was announced.

Care Remedies is a family run, domiciliary care service providing support to 24 people living in their own homes who are in receipt of the regulated activity of personal care. The service supports older people and people who are living with dementia or other conditions, to enable them to continue living in their own homes. Some people privately funded their care whilst others had their care funded by the local authority. The service is based in Eastbourne, East Sussex. .

The service was owned by two providers, one of which was the 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.

People told us they felt safe. One person told us, “They’re always careful with me I’ve never been hurt”. Another person told us, “Oh yes I can trust them, there has never been any mishaps”. Staff had received induction training and had access to on-going training to ensure their knowledge was current and that they had the relevant skills to meet peoples’ needs. People were safeguarded from harm. Staff had received training in safeguarding adults at risk, they were aware of the policies and procedures in place in relation to safeguarding and knew how to raise concerns.

There were sufficient staff to meet peoples’ needs and people told us that they were cared for by kind and caring staff. One person told us, “Very nice, helpful, I like them all. I’ve had them a long time”. People confirmed that they were treated with respect and dignity and their privacy maintained. One person told us “They cover me with a towel, always clean up after themselves and leave everything tidy”. Another person told us, “Always respectful, always nice, they don’t treat you like an old person”.

Risk assessments had been undertaken and were regularly reviewed. They considered peoples’ physical and cognitive needs as well as hazards in the environment and provided guidance to staff in relation to how to support people safely. There were low incidences of accidents and incidents, those that had occurred had been recorded and were used to inform practice. People received their medicines on time, they were administered by staff that had undertaken relevant training and who had their competence assessed. People had access to relevant health professionals to maintain good health. People were supported with their hydration and nutrition and were offered support according to their needs and preferences.

Staff had undertaken essential training as well as training that was specific to peoples’ needs and conditions. People felt that the staff were well trained and felt confident that they had the right skills to meet their needs. One person told us, “I’ve every confidence in them, no problems”. People told us they were asked for their consent before being supported. For example, when being supported with their personal hygiene or to take medicine. The providers and staff understood that people should be supported to make their own decisions, and when people had difficulty with this, had involved the relevant people to ensure any decisions made were in the person’s best interests. People were involved in their care and decisions that related to this. People were asked their preferences when they first joined the service and these were respected and accommodated. Regular reviews ensured that peoples’ care was current and appropriate for their needs.

There was a warm and friendly atmosphere within the service. People were complementary about the leadership and management. One member of staff told us, “Best company I’ve ever worked for, I’m supported, I’m really happy”. Staff felt supported by the providers and were able to develop in their roles. Quality assurance processes were carried out to ensure that the quality of care provided, as well as the environment itself, was meeting the needs of people. The providers had good systems and processes in place to ensure that the service people received was effective.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 14 February 2017

The service was safe.

There were effective systems in place to ensure that people were cared for by staff that were suitable to work in the sector. Staff were aware of how to recognise signs of abuse and knew the procedures to follow if there were concerns regarding a person’s safety.

Risks to peoples’ safety were assessed and appropriate action taken to ensure their safety.

People received their medicines on time, these were dispensed by staff that had undertaken relevant training and whose competence was assessed.

Effective

Good

Updated 14 February 2017

The service was effective.

People were involved in day-to-day decisions that affected their care. The registered manager and staff had a good understanding of the legal requirements in relation to gaining consent for people who lacked capacity and had working in accordance with this.

People were cared for by staff that had received training and had the skills to meet their needs. People had access to health care services to maintain their health and well-being.

People were able to choose what they had to eat and drink and were provided with support according to their needs.

Caring

Good

Updated 14 February 2017

The service was caring.

People and relatives consistently commented on the kindness and caring nature of staff.

People were actively involved in the care that was provided to them. Staff had an awareness of peoples’ individual needs and independence was encouraged.

Peoples’ privacy and dignity were promoted and maintained. There was consistent feedback regarding the respectful nature of staff.

Responsive

Good

Updated 14 February 2017

The service was responsive.

People received a personalised service that was centred on them. Changes in peoples’ needs were recognised and appropriate actions taken.

People were supported by staff to maintain their individuality and to participate and engage in pass times to reduce the risk of social isolation.

Feedback from people and their relatives was welcomed and encouraged. People felt that their views and opinions were listened to and acted upon.

Well-led

Good

Updated 14 February 2017

The service was well-led.

People and staff were positive about the management and culture of the service.

Quality assurance processes monitored practice to ensure the delivery of high quality care and to drive improvement.

People were treated as individuals, their opinions and wishes were taken into consideration in relation to the running of the service and the delivery of the care they received.