You are here

Cheshire West and Chester Reablement Service Good

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

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 15 August 2018

We carried out an inspection of Cheshire County Council domiciliary care on the 18, 20 and 22 June 2018. All visits were announced.

This was the first inspection of this service since it was registered in July 2016.

This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats in the community. It provides a service to predominantly older adults. The service operates a reablement service to people following discharge from hospital for them to gain independence in daily living skills once more. Support packages typically last 6 weeks. The service covers all of the Cheshire West area. At the time of our visit, the service supported approximately 100 people.

A registered manager was 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.

Staff had a good understanding of the types of abuse that could occur and how to raise concerns. Staff were aware of the whistleblowing procedure and how external agencies could be contacted to raise theses.

Recruitment was robust and included checks to ensure that new staff were suitable to support vulnerable people.

Medicines management was robust with any error in medication recording being picked up quickly, managed and reported appropriately.

Staff rotas were in place and systems established to ensure that sufficient staff were available to meet people’s needs. Staff rotas meant that calls were never missed and that both staff and people who used the service were kept safe.

Risk assessments were in place. These were up to date and minimised potential risks in the support they received as well as risks in their home environment.

The registered provider paid attention to the infection control with details for staff available promoting this as well as the provision of personal protective equipment to minimise infection spreading.

Staff received the training they needed to perform their role. Staff received supervision so that their performance could be discussed and developed.

The nutritional needs of people were taken into account with support being provided that sought to increase and maintain people’s independence.

The health needs of people were taken into account with people's health being monitored and responded to where appropriate.

The registered provider had set up effective communication systems within the service to ensure that staff were aware of the progress of individuals as well as changes to positive working practices.

People were treated in a kind, patient and dignified manner.

Staff were aware of how people’s privacy could be promoted.

People’s personal information was kept safe and secure.

The ethos of the agency was to promote independence and for people who used the service to regain life skills to achieve full independence. Care plans were devised in such a way to achieve this and people felt as though they had regained essential life skills in order to live independently.

Information was provided to people in appropriate formats with alternative formats being made available.

Care plans were person centred and geared to achieving independence for people. Appropriate assessments on people’s needs were gained prior to them using the service. Assessments covered all aspects of people’s daily living.

The service did not directly provide assistance with social activities yet the support provided enabled people to re-stablish social links once independent living had been achieved.

A complaints procedure was in Place. No one had needed to make a complaint yet information was available if the need arose.

The service had a registered manager in place. Staff felt supported by the management team.

People who used the servic

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 15 August 2018

The service was safe.

Sufficient staff were available to support people who used the service.

Staff were recruited appropriately.

Risk assessments were in place to ensure that people were kept safe.

Effective

Good

Updated 15 August 2018

The service was effective.

Staff received the training and supervision they needed to perform their role.

The nutritional needs of people were met.

People told us that they considered staff to be experienced and well trained to support them.

Caring

Good

Updated 15 August 2018

The service was caring.

People told us that the staff were caring.

Staff promoted the independence of people to regain daily life skills.

People�s confidential information was protected.

Responsive

Good

Updated 15 August 2018

The service was responsive.

Care plans were person centred.

Assessments were obtained outlining people�s needs.

A complaints procedure was available for people to raise concerns.

Well-led

Good

Updated 15 August 2018

The service was well led.

The registered provider used a variety of audits to check on the quality of support provided.

The registered provider always informed us of adverse incidents that affected people who used the service.

People told us that the service was well run.