You are here

Archived: South Tyneside Home Assessment Reablement Good

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 26 April 2017

The inspection took place on 15 and 23 February 2017 and was announced. We last inspected the service on 20 January 2016 and 3 February 2016 and found the provider had breached the regulations relating to medicines management, staffing, person centred care and good governance.

South Tyneside Home Assessment Reablement Team is a domiciliary care agency providing personal care to adults who require short term, focussed support to increase their independence and confidence to live at home. They usually provide care for up to six weeks.

The provider had made progress since our last inspection and was meeting the requirements of the regulations. The service now had a registered manager. 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. Care workers told us the new registered manager was approachable.

The service had completed the actions identified in a comprehensive action plan. There were other systems in place to check on the quality of care people received. These included quality monitoring checks on care workers, medicines audits and care file audits. These had been effective in resolving any issues identified.

Although care records contained more personalised information, support plans still needed further development to clearly document the specific support people needed. We have made a recommendation about this. Goals had been identified for people to work towards to help promote their independence. These were usually general and not specific to each person’s needs and abilities.

The quality of medicines records had improved so they accounted for the medicines care workers had given people. Trained and competent care workers were responsible for administering medicines. Checks were in place to help ensure people received their medicines correctly.

Care workers understood the importance of safeguarding adults and the provider’s whistle blowing procedure. They also knew how to report concerns. Previous safeguarding concerns had been referred to the local authority safeguarding team and investigated.

People confirmed care workers were reliable and consistent. Care workers confirmed they had enough time allowed in their rota to arrive at calls on time.

There were effective recruitment procedures in place to check new care workers were suitable to

work for the service.

A contingency plan was in place to deal with emergency situations.

People gave us consistently good feedback about their care. They said they were treated with dignity and respect by kind and considerate care workers.

Care workers had completed the training they needed. They told us they were well supported and had regular supervisions and appraisals.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives. This included support with their nutritional and health care needs.

People knew how to complain and said they had no concerns about their care. There had been no complaints received since our last inspection.

People were consulted about the support provided. They had given positive feedback describing the service as ‘excellent’; ‘professional’; ‘wonderful’; and ‘fantastic’.

Inspection areas



Updated 26 April 2017

The service was safe.

Medicines were managed safely.

Staff knew how to report concerns relating to people�s safety.

People received care from a consistent group of reliable care workers.

New care workers were recruited appropriately.



Updated 26 April 2017

The service was effective.

Staff said they received good support. Training was up to date for all care workers.

People were asked for consent. They were supported to make choices and decisions about their care.

People were supported to have enough to eat and drink and to access the health care they needed.



Updated 26 April 2017

The service was caring.

People said they received good care.

People were treated with dignity and respect.

Care workers described how they promoted people�s independence.


Requires improvement

Updated 26 April 2017

The service was not always responsive.

Support plans required further development as they were not personalised and lacked detail.

Other care records contained personalised information about each person.

People had goals to work towards and progress was reviewed.

People said they knew how to complain but did not have any concerns.



Updated 26 April 2017

The service was well led.

Care workers gave positive feedback about management of the service and the approachability of the new registered manager.

There was an effective quality assurance process in place.

Progress had been made to complete a comprehensive service improvement plan.

People had been consulted and gave positive feedback about the care they had received.