You are here

Joint Community Rehabilitation Service Good

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 29 July 2017

This inspection took place on 28 April and 2 May 2017 and was announced. We gave the provider 48 hours’ notice because we needed to be sure the right people would be available to talk to us when we visited.

Joint Community Rehab Service (JCR) provides a reablement and rehabilitation service to people in their own homes. It is a partnership between the local authority and East Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust (ESHT). They provide short term support of up to six weeks to people, usually following discharge from hospital after and illness or accident. The aim of the service is to maximise people’s ability to live independent lives, improve their health, well-being and confidence and on occasion, prevent admission to hospital. People can also be referred urgently to the service by a GP or other healthcare professional, to help prevent them being admitted to hospital. The service was supporting 61 people at the time of this inspection.

There is a registered manager at the service. 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 experienced good care and support. Staff knew how to safeguard people from abuse and what they should do if they thought someone was at risk. Risks to individuals were well managed and people were able to stay safe without having their freedoms restricted. Managers and staff promoted peoples independence and encouraged positive risk taking. If an incident or accident did occur, they were well reported and investigated. Staff understood the importance of learning from incidents, so they could make sure they did not happen again

Staff were caring and always ensured they treated people with dignity and respect. They had an excellent understanding of the care and support needs of people using the service. People told us staff had supported them with goal setting and working with them to achieve their goals. They also told us staff had enabled them to regain their confidence to do things they had previously done. People’s care was personalised to reflect their wishes and what was important to them.

People and those important to them, such as their relatives, were asked for feedback about the quality of the service. Any feedback received was acted on, and any concerns were dealt with quickly before the formal complaints procedure was needed. The registered manager and staff knew what they should do if anyone made a complaint.

There were always enough staff on duty. Staff knew people well and understood how to meet people’s needs. Staff were properly trained and made sure people received their medicines safely and on time. Recruitment practices were safe.

Staff were well supported with training, supervision and appraisal which helped them to ensure they provided effective care for people. Staff also received additional specialist training in relation to the rehabilitation of people. Staff competencies were assessed before they were able to support people unsupervised. The registered manager and staff had a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act (2015) (MCA) and made sure they gained people’s consent in line with legislation.

Person centred care was an important part of the service and staff made sure people were at the centre of everything they did. Care plans focused on the whole person, and assessments and plans were regularly updated. People’s individual preferences, needs and choices were always taken into account by the kind and caring. When required, people were well supported to eat and drink enough. Staff understood the importance of good nutrition to help people’s recovery.

The service was well led. There was a clear set of values in place which all of the staff put into practice. The registered mana

Inspection areas



Updated 29 July 2017

The service was safe.

People were safe because staff knew what they needed to do to keep people safe and were clear about what they should do to safeguard people.

People had individual risk assessments and risk management plans were in place to keep them safe, while promoting their independence.

There were enough staff to meet people’s needs and recruitment practices were safe.

Where required people’s medicines were safely managed and people received their medicines as prescribed.



Updated 29 July 2017

People experienced effective care and staff were well supported with training, supervision and appraisal.

People were asked for their consent to care in a way they could understand. Staff had a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act (2005) and always acted in people’s best interests.

People were supported to have enough food and drink, and to make healthy choices.

Staff helped people to maintain good health and made all of the appropriate referrals to health care professionals when it was needed.



Updated 29 July 2017

The service was good at providing people with caring support.

People were well cared for by staff who treated them with kindness and compassion. Providing people with the best care possible was important for all members of staff and there was a strong person centred culture which put people first.

People were helped to be involved as much as possible in making decisions about their care.

People’s privacy and dignity was well protected and staff were clear about what they needed to do to make sure they maintained people’s



Updated 29 July 2017

The service was responsive.

People experienced care that was centred on them as an individual and reflected their choices and preferences. People were involved in planning their care and their changing needs were responded to. People were supported to move between services when they required.

The service sought feedback from people and staff about the overall quality of the service. People’s views were listened to and acted upon.



Updated 29 July 2017

The leadership and management of the service was good.

Managers and the provider promoted strong values and a person centred culture which was supported by a committed staff group. The registered manager and staff aimed to drive Improvement.

Leadership was visible at all levels and there were clear lines of accountability. The registered manager and other senior staff and managers were well regarded by people and relatives. People experienced a good quality service because the registered manager and provider positively encouraged staff to do all they could to deliver good quality care.