Archived: Reablement Service

Is the service safe?

We saw records that showed all staff had attended training in safeguarding adults and the Mental Capacity Act (2005). All care workers and managers we spoke with demonstrated a good knowledge of the principles of safeguarding and gave us examples of raising concerns and of the provider following these concerns up. The staff we spoke with understood the procedures they needed to follow to ensure people were safe.

Procedures for dealing with emergencies were in place and staff were able to describe these to us.

Is the service effective?

People all had an individual care plan which set out their care needs. People told us they had been fully involved in the assessment of their health and care needs and had contributed to developing their care plan.

The service had systems in place to monitor the care provided and to ensure people were happy with it.

Is the service caring?

People we spoke with said they felt staff treated them with respect and dignity. We saw staff introducing themselves and talking and listening to people in a respectful and warm way. Care workers showed patience and gave encouragement when supporting people. People told us "the staff are friendly", "they're fantastic", "they're really nice to me" and "they're flexible and always there when I need them". People told us they felt safe and secure and this was confirmed by friends and relatives.

Staff were aware of people's preferences, interests, aspirations and diverse needs. Our observations of the care provided, discussions with people and records we looked at told us that individual wishes for care and support were taken into account and respected.

Is the service responsive?

Information about the service was provided both verbally and in writing and focused on people having choices and on helping them maintain their independence. People told us they had been given opportunities to ask questions and had any concerns listened to and acted on. People and relatives knew how to make a complaint if they were unhappy. They told us the service took complaints seriously and looked into them quickly.

The service worked well with other agencies and services to make sure people received the right care. People told us they were involved in reviewing their plans of care when their needs changed.

Is the service well-led?

The service had quality assurance systems, and records showed that identified problems and opportunities to change things for the better were addressed promptly. As a result the quality of the service was continuously improving.

Staff told us they were clear about their roles and responsibilities. They had a good understanding of the ethos of the service and the quality assurance processes were in place. This helped to ensure people received a good quality service at all times.

We looked at nine people's reablement plans and associated records. We found that records were suitable to meet people's needs and were accurately completed and tailored to people's individual needs and associated risks. We spoke with people who use the service. People told us that they received continuity of care and that the same small group of familiar faces usually provided their care.

We found that people were effectively supported to increase their independence in completing tasks and that their goals had been discussed and agreed before the service began. People's choices and preferences were known and promoted.

We spoke with enablers who support people using the service. We found that they knew people's needs and that they understood how to support people to achieve agreed outcomes.

The service worked effectively with other agencies as well as having their own team of specialists to make sure that people were appropriately cared for when being supported by or moving between different providers.

We found that at the time of our inspection the service had not had a registered manager in post as required by the Health and Social Act 2008 since the date it was registered with the Care Quality Commission.

We spoke with three of the people who used the service and a relative of another person. One person told us 'the service was brilliant, we were very, very pleased with the service'. Another person told us the service was 'very good, carers are very nice'.

We found that the provider promoted people's independence and that care staff supported people to regain confidence in supporting themselves in their own homes. People were involved in decisions about their care and their choices were supported. One person who used the service told us 'all the carers really help and I do what I can'

We found the provider assessed and regularly reviewed people's needs so that they were provided with appropriate care at all times. The provider made sure that people received continuity of care as the same small number of enablers provided care to people.

We found that the provider had taken steps to protect people who used the service from the risks of abuse, and that they had effective procedures for making sure that people who worked for the service were suitable to work with the people they supported.

We found that the provider assessed the quality of care provided, had carried out a review of compliance against CQC standards, and had taken action to make sure they met these standards.