• Services in your home
  • Homecare service

Archived: Eden Community Services

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Abbotts Bank, Friargate, Penrith, Cumbria, CA11 7XR (01768) 868559

Provided and run by:
Richmond Fellowship (The)

All Inspections

10 December 2018

During a routine inspection

The inspection took place on 10 and 12 December 2018. The inspection was announced. We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection visit because it is small and we needed to be sure that there was someone at the office to assist us with the inspection. This was our first inspection of the service.

Eden Community Services is a domiciliary care agency. The service provides care and support to people living in ‘supported living’ settings, so that they can live in their own home as independently as possible. People’s care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. CQC does not regulate premises used for supported living; this inspection looked at people’s personal care and support. It provides a service to older adults and younger adults with mental health issues. Not everyone using Eden Community Service receives the regulated activity; CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also take into account any wider social care provided. At the time of our inspection there were two people receiving support with personal care.

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 told us the staff team were kind and caring. They spoke positively about the support provided by the service. We observed that there was a welcoming and friendly atmosphere at the service. The people we spoke to also commented on the friendliness of the service.

People had personalised support plans, health plans and activity plans to ensure their individual needs were met. People and their relatives, where appropriate, had been involved as much as possible in the care and support planning process. This helped to make sure their support was personalised to their needs and preferences.

Risks to people, including risks relating to the premises and equipment, were effectively assessed, monitored and reduced. Staff knew what to do in an emergency. There was a safe system to manage and administer medicines.

There were enough staff to meet people's needs and safe recruitment procedures were in place. Support workers had adequate training to meet people's needs and keep them safe.

People were supported with food, drink and shopping where this had been identified in their needs assessments. Health needs were addressed and people were supported to access these types of services when necessary.

People and their relatives said they felt safe at the service. People were supported by staff that knew them very well. Support workers were knowledgeable about what the signs of abuse might be and how they should report any concerns.

The management team were aware of their responsibilities with regards to keeping people safe (safeguarding) and worked with local authority, NHS and Police to address any concerns.

We saw and heard support workers treating people respectfully. People were encouraged to be as independent as possible. Social inclusion was encouraged. People were supported and encouraged to take part in social activities within the service as well as maintaining links with the community.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives as was assessed to be safe and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; all staff worked within the guidelines of the Mental Capacity Act 2005; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

Support workers said they felt well supported and that the management team were very approachable.

There were robust systems in place to monitor the quality and safety of the service. People's views were sought about the service through regular tenants’ meetings and annual surveys.

People and their relatives told us they had not needed to raise any complaints about the service. There was a complaints procedure in place and people told us that they knew who to speak to if they were not happy with the service they received.