You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 14 June 2017

This inspection took place on 24 May 2017. It was an announced visit to the service.

This was the first inspection since the provider registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to provide personal care to people. The service supported people who lived in their own homes. At the time of the inspection five people were supported with live-in staff known as support companions.

At the time of the inspection there was no 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. The previous registered manager de-registered in April 2017. The service had appointed a new manager and they had submitted an application to CQC to become the registered manager.

We received lots of positive feedback from people we contacted. There was an overriding theme that the care provided to people by staff had had a positive impact on people’s physical, emotional and spiritual well-being. We were informed health had improved and some people had returned to activities they had not attended for some time.

We received feedback that staff were exceptionally kind and caring. One relative told us “My mother needed to attend a hospital appointment and I had arranged to meet [name of support worker] outside. When I went inside to meet my mother, she was sitting in the café. For a split second I did not recognise her. She was smartly turned out, hair done.” The relative went on to say why that was particularly important. They told us prior to the introduction of the support worker their mother had been neglecting herself and was often seen in an unkempt state. They told us their mother had always been interested in clothes and fashion and had always previously taken pride in their appearance. It was clear the staffs’ intervention had supported the person to regain their dignity and pride in her appearance. We received lots of other examples of how caring staff were.

The service had an experienced management team in place. The managing director was integral to the running of the service. They were affiliated to a number of business networks which promoted new ideas in the industry, drove improvements and developments for people supported by Eximius.

There was a clear vision by all staff to provide a person centred service which aimed to enable and empower people to live the life they choose. This was supported by what a relative told us, “The company stood out from the start, the response I got from the moment the phone was answered by [name of managing director] was stratospherically way above the other companies I had spoken with.”

Staff were recruited through a robust system and people were involved in handpicking their own support worker.

Staff were fully aware of how to promote people’s safety and told us they would report any concerns to the office. Staff and relatives told us they had confidence in the office to deal with any concerns raised.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 14 June 2017

The service was safe.

People were protected from harm because staff received training to be able to identify and report abuse. There were procedures in place for staff to follow in the event of any abuse happening.

People’s likelihood of experiencing injury or harm was reduced because risk assessments had been written to identify areas of potential risk.

Effective

Good

Updated 14 June 2017

The service was effective.

People were cared for by staff who were aware of their roles and responsibilities.

People were cared for by staff who had been equipped with the right skills to provide safe care and treatment.

Caring

Outstanding

Updated 14 June 2017

The service was exceptionally caring.

People were supported to live the life of their choice and were fully involved in decisions about their care.

People were treated with dignity and respect.

Responsive

Good

Updated 14 June 2017

The service was responsive.

People were able to identify someone they could speak with if they had any concerns. There were procedures for making compliments and complaints about the service.

People were supported to access a range of healthcare and appointments were made promptly when needed.

Well-led

Good

Updated 14 June 2017

The service was well-led.

People’s needs were appropriately met because the service had an experienced and skilled management team to provide effective leadership and support.

People could be confident there was a clear culture to provide a high quality service.