You are here

This service was previously registered at a different address - see old profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 27 September 2016

This inspection took place on 12 and 14 September 2016, with an announced visit to the service.

Gemini Exclusive Care provides people with personal care in their own homes in Bedford. They provide care to older people, as well as people with physical disabilities. When we inspected the service they were providing care to 18 people.

The service had a registered manager in post. 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 when they received care from the service and staff worked to protect them from harm or abuse. There were systems to identify potential risks to people, and to put steps in place to help staff manage those risks effectively. Staffing levels were consistent and sufficient to meet people's needs without the need for agency staff. Background checks and references were completed for all staff members to ensure they were of good character and suitable for their roles.

Staff were given the training and support they needed to equip them with the skills and knowledge required to meet people's needs. Staff received regular supervision and were able to discuss any concerns they had. People's consent to their care and support was sought and there were systems in place to help make best interest decisions if people lacked mental capacity. Staff supported people to maintain a healthy and balanced diet and helped them to see healthcare professionals if necessary.

People were treated with kindness and compassion by staff members. Staff worked to build strong relationships with people and their family members, which helped them to deliver people's care in the way they wanted. Information about people's care and the service was available to them and their family members and they were involved in planning their own care. Staff members treated people with respect and made sure their privacy and dignity was upheld.

Person-centred care was given, which ensured people received care and support which took their specific needs and preferences into account. Initial assessments were carried out to identify people's needs and care plans were updated on a regular basis to ensure they were accurate. Feedback from people was encouraged, as were compliments and complaints, to help the provider develop the service.

There was a positive and open culture at the service. People were happy with the care they received from members of staff and felt that there had been positive developments at the service. Staff were aware of their roles and responsibilities and were motivated to work with people and meet their needs. The manager had been newly appointed and was positive about the service and the direction they wanted to take it in. They were aware of their statutory requirements and had systems in place to oversee the service and identify areas for development.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 27 September 2016

The service was safe.

People's safety was well managed by staff that were knowledgeable about safeguarding procedures, and knew how to report suspected abuse.

There were systems in place to assess and manage risks, with control measures implemented to reduce the impact of identified risks.

There were enough staff members to meet people's needs and staff recruitment was conducted in a safe and robust fashion.

If required, staff supported people to take their medication and completed appropriate records to demonstrate this.

Effective

Good

Updated 27 September 2016

The service was effective.

Staff members received regular training and supervision to equip them with the knowledge and skills they needed to perform their roles.

People's consent to their care had been sought and documented. If people lacked the mental capacity to agree to their care, there were systems in place to act in their best interests, in accordance with the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

If required, staff supported people to maintain a healthy and nutritious diet.

Staff also supported people to make and attend appointments with their health care professionals where necessary.

Caring

Good

Updated 27 September 2016

The service was caring.

There were positive relationships between people and members of staff. Staff treated people with kindness and compassion.

People were involved in their care and were provided with information about the care package and the service itself.

Staff members respected people's privacy and treated them with dignity.

Responsive

Good

Updated 27 September 2016

The service was responsive.

People received person-centred care which was sensitive to their individual needs, wishes and preferences.

Care plans were reviewed on a regular basis to ensure they were accurate and a reflection of people's current care needs.

Feedback and complaints from people and their family members was welcomed by the service and used to help drive improvements.

Well-led

Good

Updated 27 September 2016

The service was well-led.

There was an open and positive culture at the service. People were happy with the care that they received and staff were motivated.

There was a registered manager in post at the service who understood their statutory obligations in respect of the Care Quality Commission.

Audits and quality assurance processes were in place to help identify areas for improvement at the service.