You are here

Archived: Abe Health Care Ltd Head Office

Reports


Inspection carried out on 13 May 2014

During a routine inspection

At this inspection we set out to answer our five questions; Is the service caring? Is the service responsive? Is the service safe? Is the service effective? Is the service well led? We gathered information from people using the service by telephoning them. We spoke with one person who used the service and two of their relatives.

At the time of this inspection the manager told us that two people were using the service and a further person�s service had been suspended due to illness.

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary is based on our observations during the inspection, speaking with people using the service, the staff supporting them and from looking at records.

If you want to see the evidence supporting our summary please read our full report.

Is the service safe?

People told us they felt safe. Safeguarding procedures were in place and staff understood how to safeguard people they supported.

Systems were in place to make sure that the manager and staff learned from events such as accidents and incidents and complaints investigations. This reduces the risks to people and helps the service to continually improve.

Recruitment practice is safe and thorough. Policies and procedures were in place to make sure that unsafe practice was identified and people are protected.

Is the service effective?

People�s health and care needs were assessed with them, and information was available that told staff how to support them. Relative we spoke with told us they were happy with the care and support given by staff at the agency.

Is the service caring?

Care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that ensured people's safety and welfare. Relatives we spoke with told us there was a care plan which staff recorded the details of the care and support given at each visit. We found records held at the office reflected the care delivered to the two people currently receiving a service.

Relative we spoke with said, �The staff are very good they ensure they help my relative to maintain their independence.�

When speaking with staff it was clear that they genuinely cared for the people they supported.

Is the service responsive?

People knew how to make a complaint if they were unhappy. Relatives told us they did not have any complaints and were happy with how the care was delivered. They said they would feel confident raising any concerns they might have with the care workers.

Is the service well-led?

The manager was unable to show us how the views of people who used the service were gained. The manager told us any comments received from people who used the service or their relatives were dealt with immediately. He told us he visited people regularly to ask if the service was working and if any improvements were required

Staff told us they were clear about their roles and responsibilities. This helped to ensure that people received a good quality service at all times.

Inspection carried out on 22 October 2013

During a routine inspection

At the time of this inspection we found there were four people using the service. The manager told us they were a small domiciliary care agency which employed three staff.

We spoke with one person who used the service and two relatives. They told us staff turned up on time and they would let them know if they were going to be late. People and relatives we spoke with told us staff always respected their privacy and rights and they helped them to maintain their independence. One person said, The staff are very good they turn up on time and if they are going to be late they let me know." One relative said, "They come so I can have a welcome break, They are always polite and respectful."

There were effective systems in place to reduce the risk and spread of infection. This included staff receiving training in this subject and the provision of protective equipment.

We found some improvement was needed to ensure staff working at the service was suitable to work with vulnerable adults.

The provider had some systems to monitor the effectiveness of the service; however improvements were needed to ensure records were available for inspection.

Inspection carried out on 4 January 2013

During a routine inspection

We were not able to speak with people who received a service however we spoke with relatives of people who received a service. We also spoke with health care professionals who had worked with the service.

Relatives told us the service provided was good and their relatives needs were met. They also told us they supported their relatives to participate in activities outside of their home. This included snooker, shopping and having a haircut.

The health care professionals told us the provider was very flexible and worked with them to ensure the needs of the person who was receiving a service were met. One healthcare worker told us the provider carried out a two hour introductory visit to ascertain if they could meet the person�s needs. The worker felt this was good practice.