You are here

Archived: Gemini Exclusive Care

This service is now registered at a different address - see new profile

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 8 August 2013
Date of Publication: 17 August 2013
Inspection Report published 17 August 2013 PDF

People should get safe and appropriate care that meets their needs and supports their rights (outcome 4)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Experience effective, safe and appropriate care, treatment and support that meets their needs and protects their rights.

How this check was done

We looked at the personal care or treatment records of people who use the service, carried out a visit on 8 August 2013, talked with people who use the service and talked with carers and / or family members. We talked with staff.

Our judgement

People experienced care, treatment and support that met their needs and protected their rights.

Reasons for our judgement

We looked at the care records for seven people and saw that a comprehensive assessment had been completed to assess people’s support needs. We read that these had included for example, an assessment of people’s mobility, continence, eating and leisure interests. We noted that when a risk of falls had been identified that an accommodation risk assessment had also been completed. We saw that the accompanying falls care plan stated what extra precautions had been taken for example, to ensure that the environment was free of trip hazard, such as rugs.

We read in records that the manager had referred people to a community based health care professional to consider equipment to aid mobility and reduce the potential for falls. We also noted that when people had problems with continence, the manager had requested a continence assessment from the district nurse. This meant that the care plan was updated as needs had changed. People's needs were assessed and care was planned and delivered in line with their individual care plan.

We read in one care plan that staff should contact the manager if people were finding it more difficult to walk. We read that when concerns had been raised the manager had accompanied staff so that an assessment of needs could be reviewed. We were told that one person had been unwell when staff had visited and that they had contacted the persons GP for advice and that medicine had been prescribed as a result. This meant that care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure people's safety and welfare.

We saw in care plans that people should be given privacy when they used the toilet. And we were told that family members were requested to leave the room while personal care was being given. We noted that staff had received training in dignity in home care. Care was planned and delivered in a way that ensured people’s privacy and dignity was respected at all times.

We saw that the manager had arrangements in place to deal with emergencies. There was a ‘key contacts’ sheet with numbers to call in the event of disruption to the service such as loss of power. We were also told that the manager had been able to respond to two overnight calls when a person needed urgent support outside of the normal visit time. This meant that there were systems in place to mitigate the risks posed by emergencies to people using the service.