You are here

Nurse Plus and Carer Plus (UK) Limited - Suite 18 Ingles Manor Good

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 22 September 2018

This inspection was carried out between 21 and 22 August 2018 and was announced. Two days’ notice of the inspection was given because we needed to be sure that people who wanted to speak to us were available during the inspection.

This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats in the community and people living in specialist ‘extra care’ housing. Extra care housing is purpose-built or adapted single household accommodation in a shared site or building. The accommodation is rented, and is the occupant’s own home. People’s care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. CQC does not regulate premises used for extra care housing; this inspection looked at people’s personal care service.

Nurse Plus and Carer Plus provides a service to adults, older adults, people living with dementia or mental health needs, physically disabled people and people with a learning disability or autistic spectrum disorder. There were 105 people receiving a service at the time of our inspection.

The registered manager had left the service in April 2018 and a new manager was leading the service. 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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

At the last inspection on 17 July 2017, we asked the provider to take action to make improvements to the way they managed people’s medicines, mitigated risks to people and checked to make sure the service was provided to the standards they required. At this inspection we found that all the shortfalls had been addressed and the service that people received had improved.

People’s medicines were well managed. Guidance was available to staff and people received their medicines. Assessments of people’s needs had been completed and any risks had been identified with people and their relatives. Guidance was now available to staff about how mitigate risks to people and keep them safe. People received care tailored to them, in the way they preferred.

Changes in people’s health were identified and staff supported people to contact their doctor. People were supported to eat and drink enough. Staff followed safe practices to prevent infections.

Everyone we spoke with told us the staff were kind, caring and friendly, and treated them with dignity and respect at all times. They told us staff knew them well and provided their care in the way they wanted. People were given privacy. Everyone was supported to be as independent as they wanted to be. Staff supported people to take part in leisure activities they liked.

Staff were kind, caring and compassionate. People received care in the way they preferred at the end of their life. One person’s relative told us, “My loved one wants to stay at home for as long as possible and without the carers it would not be possible, it’s unthinkable really what we would do without them”.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. Everyone was able to make decisions for themselves and staff supported them to do this.

Staff knew the signs of abuse and were confident to raise any concerns they had with the manager or provider. People were not discriminated against. A process was in place to investigate and respond to complaints and small day to day issues had been resolved immediately to people’s satisfaction.

There were enough staff available to give people the support they needed, when they needed it. Staff arrived at the agreed time and stayed for the required length of time. People told us they knew if staff would be late and who would provide their care. Staff rotas were pla

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 22 September 2018

The service was safe.

Risks to people had been identified and mitigated. Staff supported people to be as independent and safe as possible.

People were protected from the risks of unsafe medicines management.

Staff knew how to keep people safe if they were at risk of abuse or discrimination.

Action was taken to stop accidents and incidents happening again.

There were enough staff to provide the care people needed.

Staff practice prevented and controlled infection.

Checks were completed on staff to make sure they were honest, trustworthy and reliable before they worked alone with people.

Effective

Good

Updated 22 September 2018

The service was effective.

People’s needs were assessed with them.

Staff followed the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (2005). People were supported to make their own decisions.

Staff were supported and had the skills they required to provide the care and treatment people needed.

People were supported to eat and drink enough to help keep them as healthy as possible.

People were supported to remain healthy.

Caring

Good

Updated 22 September 2018

The service was caring.

People were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and had control over their care.

Staff were respectful of people’s cultural needs, sexual orientation or gender identity.

People were supported to be regain and maintain their independence.

Responsive

Good

Updated 22 September 2018

The service was responsive.

People had planned their care with staff. Each person had a care plan that was tailored to meet their individual needs.

People participated in leisure activities they enjoyed.

Any concerns people had were resolved to their satisfaction.

People received the care they preferred at the end of their life.

Well-led

Good

Updated 22 September 2018

The service was well-led.

Checks were completed on the quality of the service and action was taken to remedy any shortfalls.

People, their relatives and staff shared their views and experiences of the service and these were acted on.

Staff shared the provider’s vision of a good quality service.

Staff were motivated and led by the manager. They had clear roles and responsibilities and were accountable for their actions.

Staff worked with other agencies to ensure people’s needs were met.