You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 14 September 2016

This inspection took place 25 and 26 January 2016 and was unannounced.

Isabel Hospice provides care for people with life limiting illnesses through its inpatient unit, hospice at home service, day care unit and its specialist community palliative nursing care service.

There was a manager in place who was in the process of registering with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to be 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 felt safe. Staff had received training to enable them to recognise signs and symptoms of abuse and how to report them. People had risk assessments in place to enable them to be as independent as they could be.

There were sufficient staff, with the correct skill mix, on duty to support people with their needs. Effective recruitment processes were in place and followed by the service.

Medicines, including controlled medicines, were managed safely. The processes in place ensured that the administration and handling of medicines was suitable for the people who used the service.

Staff received a comprehensive induction process and ongoing training. They were well supported by the management team and had regular one to one time for supervision. Staff had attended a variety of training to ensure they were able to provide care based on current practice when supporting people.

Staff gained consent before supporting people and ensured their choices were acted on. People were supported to make decisions about all aspects of their life; this was underpinned by the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. Staff were knowledgeable of this guidance and correct processes were in place to protect people.

People were able to make choices about the food and drink they had, and staff gave support when required.

People were supported to access a variety of health professionals when required.

Staff provided care and support in a caring and meaningful way. They knew the people who used the service well. People and relatives, where appropriate, were involved in the planning of their care and support.

People’s privacy and dignity was maintained at all times.

People were supported to follow their interests and join in activities.

A complaints procedure was in place and accessible to all. People knew how to complain. Effective quality monitoring systems were in place. A variety of audits were carried out and used to drive improvement.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 14 September 2016

The service was safe.

Staff were knowledgeable about protecting people from harm and abuse.

There were enough trained staff to support people with their needs.

Staff had been recruited using a robust recruitment process.

Systems were in place for the safe management of medicines.

Effective

Good

Updated 14 September 2016

The service was effective.

Staff had attended a variety of training to keep their skills up to date and were supported with regular supervision.

People could make choices about their food and drink and were provided with support when required.

People had access to health care professionals to ensure they received effective care or treatment.

Caring

Good

Updated 14 September 2016

The service was caring.

People were able to make decisions about their daily activities.

Staff treated people with kindness and compassion.

People were treated with dignity and respect, and had the privacy they required.

Responsive

Good

Updated 14 September 2016

The service was responsive.

Care and support plans were personalised and reflected people’s individual requirements.

People and their relatives were involved in decisions regarding their care and support needs.

There was a complaints system in place. People were aware of this.

Well-led

Good

Updated 14 September 2016

The service was well led.

People and their relatives knew the manager and were able to see her when required.

People and their relatives were asked for, and gave, feedback which was acted on.

Quality monitoring systems were in place.