You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 19 July 2018

This inspection took place on 20, 22 and 25 June 2018 and was announced. This service is a domiciliary care agency based in North Tyneside. It provides personal care to people living in their own homes throughout North Tyneside. Services were provided to adults with a wide range of health and social care needs. At the time of our inspection there were 65 people receiving a service.

Not everyone using Everlasting Care receives regulated activity; The Care Quality Commission (CQC) only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also consider any wider social care provided.

The service had a registered manager in post. The registered manager had been in post since the service first registered in 2014. 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 in April 2017 we rated the service as 'Requires Improvement', we asked the provider to take action and make improvements to the induction and training of staff at the service. We also recommended that guidance was sought around specific risk assessments and a review of quality monitoring and record keeping was completed. We found these actions had been promptly completed and good practice has been sustained. We have therefore rated the service as 'Good'.

People were supported by staff to maintain their health, safety and welfare in their own home. The office staff had fully completed risk assessments of the known risks people faced. These were reviewed and updated to reflect changes in people’s needs. Care records now included information in case of an emergency within people’s homes.

New staff had received a company induction and a robust induction programme was now fully embedded into the service. Staff training was up to date. Most staff told us they now received regular supervision sessions, an annual appraisal and staff meetings took place. Records confirmed this. Staff told us they felt supported by the office staff.

The registered manager ensured the service was properly monitored. We saw audits had been improved and new audits and analysis of all aspects of the service had been implemented. We saw action plans were in place to ensure any issues highlighted were dealt with promptly.

Policies and procedures were in place to help staff safeguard people from harm. Incidents of a safeguarding nature had been recorded, investigated, reported and monitored. The local authority had no concerns about the service. People told us they felt safe with the regular support from staff.

Medicines were managed safely. Medicine administration records were up to date and fully completed. Competency checks on care workers were now in place to ensure staff remained competent in their role. Regular unannounced spot checks were conducted to ensure high standards were maintained.

Staff recruitment continued to be safe and robust. There were enough staff employed to safely meet people’s needs. People told us that care workers did not rush their duties and that they had regular care workers who arrived as expected most of the time.

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.

Care plans had been re-written and now included person-centred information. We saw a new review system had been implemented following our last inspection to ensure people received suitable care to meet their needs.

People told us that care workers made meals of their choice. External healthcare professionals were involved with people’s care to monitor their health and welfare.

Without exception, people and relatives told us their care workers were friendly and they were respected in their home. People said their dignity and privacy was always maintained.

There was a complaints policy in place. We saw all complaints and minor issues had been logged, investigated and resolved in a timely manner. No-one we spoke with raised any complaints about the service.

Customer and staff surveys had been carried out which showed mostly positive results. Our pre-inspection questionnaire responses corroborated this.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 19 July 2018

The service was safe.

Accidents, incidents and safeguarding matters were investigated and reported as required.

People told us they felt safe with support from their care workers and they received their medicines in a safe manner.

People's care needs had been risk assessed and control measures were in place.

Staffing levels were appropriate and recruitment remained robust.

Effective

Good

Updated 19 July 2018

The service was effective.

Staff were trained in a variety of key topics to meet people’s needs. Competency checks were carried out.

Care workers were supported through supervision, appraisal and team meetings.

Consent to care and treatment was sought from people.

People were supported by staff to eat and drink well to maintain their well-being.

Caring

Good

Updated 19 July 2018

The service was caring.

Staff understood people’s needs and responded well to these.

People and relatives told us staff were caring and friendly. People told us they were treated with dignity and respect.

People were involved in decisions about their care and were given choice and control over their own lives.

Responsive

Good

Updated 19 July 2018

The service was responsive.

People’s needs were routinely assessed and regularly reviewed. Care plans were person-centred.

Staff offered a flexible service and people could re-arrange their service if needed.

A complaints policy was in place and people were aware of how to complain.

Well-led

Good

Updated 19 July 2018

The service was well-led.

There was an established registered manager in post.

Detailed and accurate records were kept to monitor the quality and safety of the service.

Audits and checks of the service were analysed and acted upon.

Staff told us they were supported and felt valued in their role.