You are here

European Nursing Agency Limited Good

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

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 7 April 2017

This inspection took place on 22 and 23 February and 6 March 2017. This was an announced inspection where we gave the provider 48 hours' notice because we needed to ensure someone would be available to assist us with the inspection.

We brought forward this inspection due to concerns raised with us. These concerns were about the recruitment and support of staff and the lack of reporting to the commission of safeguarding. However, we found the provider had acted on the concerns raised and clarified recruitment and support of staff as well as procedures around reporting safeguarding.

European Nursing Agency (ENA) provides live-in personal care and support to people, some of whom have complex physical needs, in their own homes as well as providing hourly personal care day visits. At the time of the inspection European Nursing Agency was supporting 106 people.

The service had a manager who was registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC). A registered manager is a person who has registered with the CQC 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run. In this instance the registered manager was also the provider.

We found further developments were needed in the assessments for activities or areas that could pose a risk to people as they were not always detailed or contained sufficient information to inform staff how to manage situations. However, staff were clear on their role and how to keep people safe.

Whilst we found there were systems in place to review the quality of the service, these were not always consistent as some of the care plans had not been reviewed and contained information that was out of date.

People told us they felt safe and were confident in staff abilities to support them. Staff were trained and supported to deliver good care. Safe and effective recruitment practices were followed to ensure that all staff were suitably qualified and experienced. There were sufficient staff with a on call team of care staff to cover emergencies.

People received care that was personalised to their needs. They were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible.

People were treated with dignity and respect and were involved in planning their care.

The registered manager and staff promoted an open inclusive culture focused on providing a personalised service for each person. However, systems in place to monitor the quality of the service were not always consistent.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 7 April 2017

The service was safe.

People told us they felt safe.

People were supported by staff who understood the safeguarding

procedures and would report concerns.

People were supported by a staff team who had been safely recruited.

Effective

Good

Updated 7 April 2017

The service was effective.

People were supported by staff who were trained and supervised.

People’s consent was sought before care was offered.

Health professionals were contacted on people’s behalf if needed

Caring

Good

Updated 7 April 2017

The service was caring.

People were treated with dignity and respect.

People were involved in planning and reviewing their care.

Responsive

Good

Updated 7 April 2017

The service was responsive.

People received personalised care that met their needs.

People were supported with interests and social interaction.

People's concerns were taken seriously and acted upon.

Well-led

Requires improvement

Updated 7 April 2017

The service was not consistently well led.

Systems in place to monitor the quality of the service were not always consistent.

People’s views were sought and information received was used to inform any changes.

There was an open culture within the agency and staff were clear as to their roles and responsibilities and the lines of accountability across the service.