You are here

Amber Healthcare Requires improvement

This service was previously registered at a different address - see old profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Requires improvement

Updated 17 August 2017

We undertook an announced inspection of Amber Healthcare on 6 and 10 July 2017. We told the provider two days before our visit that we would be coming. Amber Healthcare provides personal care services to people in their own homes. At the time of our inspection 66 people were being supported with personal care from the service.

The service did not have 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.

People’s care records did not always contain up to date and accurate information to enable staff to mitigate the risks associated with people’s care. People received their medicines as prescribed. However, staff responsible for the administration of medicines were not always up to date with their medicine training and had not always had their competencies checked.

The service was responsive to people’s changing needs. However, people’s care needs were not always reassessed following significant changes in their circumstances.

There were systems in place to monitor the quality of the service. However, these systems were not always effective. Accidents and incidents were not always reported in line with the provider’s policies and procedures.

People told us they were safe. Staff understood their responsibilities to identify and report all concerns in relation to safeguarding people from abuse. Staff had completed safeguarding training.

The service had robust recruitment procedures and conducted background checks to ensure staff were suitable for their role.

People were supported by staff who had the skills and knowledge to carry out their roles and responsibilities. People benefitted from caring relationships with staff who had a caring approach to their work.

Staff spoke positively about the support they received from the management team. Staff had access to effective supervision. Staff and the provider shared the visions and values of the service.

The service sought people's views and opinions. People and their relatives told us they were confident they would be listened to and action would be taken if they raised a concern.

Where people needed support with eating and drinking they were supported effectively. People were supported to maintain good health. Various health professionals were involved in assessing, planning and evaluating people's care and treatment.

We found two breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of this report.

Inspection areas

Safe

Requires improvement

Updated 17 August 2017

The service was not always safe.

People’s risk assessments did not always include guidance for staff to mitigate the risks associated with people’s care.

Staff responsible for the administration of medicines had not always had their competencies checked.

People and their families told us they felt safe.

Effective

Good

Updated 17 August 2017

The service was effective.

People were supported by staff who had been trained in the MCA and applied it's principles in their work.

Staff had the skills and support to meet people’s needs.

The service worked with other health professionals to ensure people's physical health needs were met.

Caring

Good

Updated 17 August 2017

The service was caring.

Staff were kind and respectful and treated people with dignity and respect.

People benefited from caring relationships.

The staff were friendly, polite and compassionate about providing support to people

Responsive

Requires improvement

Updated 17 August 2017

The service was not always responsive.

People’s care needs was not always reassessed following changes in their circumstances.

Staff understood people's needs and preferences.

The service responded to people’s changing needs.

Well-led

Requires improvement

Updated 17 August 2017

The service was not always well led.

The systems in place to monitor the quality of the service were not always effective.

Accidents and incidents were not always reported in line with the provider’s policies and procedures.

There was a whistle blowing policy in place that was available to staff. Staff knew how to raise concerns.