You are here

Archived: Unity Care Solutions Good

This service is now registered at a different address - see new profile

Reports


Inspection carried out on 6 April 2017

During a routine inspection

Unity Care Solutions is a nursing and domiciliary care agency based in Eastbourne. The office is close to the town centre and has parking spaces to the rear of the building and on local roads. It provides personal care and nursing care to adults and children living in their own homes covering Eastbourne town and the surrounding areas. People receiving this care had varied care and support needs. This included help with personal hygiene, the administration of medicines and support in the preparation of food. Some people had memory loss and lived with dementia. Other people had mobility problems and needed assistance in moving, sometimes with the support of two staff and equipment. One person had nursing needs that required 24 hour nursing care and others had complex care needs that required staff to undertake additional training including care of breathing equipment.

This inspection was announced with the provider given 48 hours’ notice. The inspection took place on the 6 April 2017. At the time of this inspection the agency was providing a service to 16 people. The agency had a registered manager who was also the provider of the service. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (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.

People’s care was personalised to reflect their wishes and what was important to them. People were supported by staff who knew them well and understood their needs and preferences. People knew when their visits were to take place and what staff member was providing the care. People were introduced to staff before they provided them with care and they were looked after by a team of regular staff. All feedback from people and their representatives regarding the service and the staff was positive. They told us they felt safe with the staff who were well trained to do their work.

The agency employed enough staff with the right skills to meet people’s needs and people’s safety was ensured through appropriate recruitment practices. There was an induction programme in place and staff received the training and support they required to meet people’s needs. Staff were trained in the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and understood the importance of people giving their consent. The management team knew the correct procedures to follow when people lacked capacity to make decisions. Staff understood and could recognise the signs of potential abuse and knew what to do if they needed to raise a safeguarding concern. Training records confirmed staff had received training on safeguarding adults and children at risk.

People were looked after by staff who were caring and kind and took account of people’s privacy and dignity. People said they were happy with the care and support staff provided to them and that it met their individual needs. The needs and choices of people had been clearly documented in their care plans. Where people’s needs changed people’s care and support plans were reviewed to ensure the person received the care and support they required.

People were regularly asked for their feedback about the service and support they received and were aware how to make a complaint. There was an open and positive culture at the service. The staff told us they felt supported and listened to by the registered manager and the office staff. The agency had clear aims and objectives and worked to improve the quality of the service. They used feedback from internal and external resources and responded positively to any feedback received.

Inspection carried out on 12 January 2016

During a routine inspection

Unity Care Solutions is a domiciliary care agency (DCA), based in Eastbourne. The office is close to the town centre and has parking spaces to the rear of the building and on local roads. It provides personal care and nursing care to people living in their own homes covering Eastbourne town and the surrounding areas. People receiving this care had varied care and support needs. This included help with personal hygiene, the administration of medicines and support in the preparation of food. Some people had memory loss and lived with dementia. Other people had mobility problems and needed assistance in moving, sometimes with the support of two staff and equipment. Some people in receipt of nursing care had complex care needs that required 24 hour nursing care.

This inspection was announced with the provider given 48 hours’ notice. The inspection took place on the 12 January 2016. At the time of this inspection the DCA was providing a service to 16 people.

The DCA had a registered manager who was also the provider of the service. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (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.

All feedback from people regarding the service and the staff was positive. They told us they felt safe with the staff who they said were well trained to do their work. One person said "The carers are all lovely, they are very friendly and are almost like members of my family and I couldn't manage to be at home without them."

Despite this positive feedback we found some areas for improvement.

All staff had undertaken training on the MCA and had an understanding of consent and people’s individual rights. However we found when people lacked capacity it was not clear how consent was sought or how decisions were made in their best interest. For example capacity assessments were not recorded. The registered manager could not be assured that all people’s rights had been considered in the provision of care and treatment.

Some systems for quality monitoring and assurance were not fully developed to ensure best practice was followed. This included the lack of effective auditing systems to ensure organisational procedures were being followed.

The service had good systems in place to keep people safe. Assessments of risks to people had been developed and reviewed. The service employed enough, qualified and well trained staff, to meet people’s needs. Staff had a good knowledge and understanding of what constituted abuse and how to respond to any suspicion of abuse.

Staff received an induction, essential training and additional specialist training in areas where people had specialist care needs for example when people had artificial feeding or a tracheostomy.

Staff had group and one to one meetings were held regularly for staff, in order for them to discuss their role and share any information or concerns.

If needed, people were supported with their food and drink and this was monitored regularly.

The needs and choices of people had been clearly documented in their care plans. Where people’s needs changed or were complex other health care professionals were involved and worked with for the best outcomes for people.

People were looked after by staff who were caring and kind and took account of people’s privacy and dignity. People had their health care needs attended to with the support and guidance of additional health and social care professionals when required. People said they were happy with the care and support staff provided to them and that it met their individual needs.

The needs and choices of people had been clearly documented in their care plans. Where people’s needs changed people’s care and support plans were reviewed to ensure the person received the care and treatment they required.

There was an established complaints procedure that people were happy to use. Records identified that the investigation into complaints were completed in a thorough and robust way.

The registered manager and the office team provided sound leadership for staff, who found them approachable and willing to listen. The DCA had clear aims and objectives and strove to improve the service by using external resources and responding to internal and external investigations and feedback from other agencies.

Inspection carried out on 20 November 2013

During a routine inspection

There were approximately 50 people receiving personal support and nursing care from the agency at the time of this inspection. We spoke with 10 people who used the agency. This included people�s representatives where appropriate.

We also spoke with three care staff, the nurse consultant, the training co-ordinator and agency manager. We also spoke with the registered manager/provider.

People told us that they were asked for their consent before staff provided personal care.

One person said, "Staff always respond to what people want, they always work in accordance to individual wishes.�

We looked at the care planning system and found that people's needs had been assessed and individual plans were in place. All of the people we spoke with said they were happy with the support and care they received.

People were protected from the risk of infection because appropriate guidance and training had been provided.

We reviewed the recruitment practice and associated documentation. We found the agency followed robust recruitment processes for the recruitment of new staff.

We looked at a number of records and found that these had been managed and completed in a consistent manner.

Inspection carried out on 23 July 2012

During a routine inspection

People told us that staff respected people�s privacy and dignity and were professional in their approach.

People told us that the standard of care and support provided was very good and that they were satisfied with the service provided.

Relatives spoken with told us that they felt able to leave the person using the service knowing that they were safe.

People using the service told us that medicines were handled correctly and were administered correctly.

All feedback about the staff was positive. People were confident that when a complaint was made it was dealt with effectively.

Inspection carried out on 5 January 2012

During a routine inspection

People told us that staff were respectful and kind.

People told us that the standard of care and support provided on the whole was very good. The main problem was maintaining suitable staff to maintain the package of care.

People who use the service confirmed a satisfaction with the staff who work regularly with them and that they had the opportunity to comment on the care delivery.