You are here

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

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 20 September 2018

We undertook an announced inspection of Amber Healthcare on 26 July 2018. This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own homes in the community. It provides a service to older adults. On the day of our inspection 48 people were being supported by the service.

There was a registered manager in post. 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.

At our last inspection on 30 March 2017 we found two breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations (2014). In that the service did not always effectively manage the risks associated with people’s care. Staff responsible for the administration of medicines did not always have the competencies checked. The provider did not have effective systems in place to monitor the quality of service.

At this inspection we found the service had made significant improvements to address these concerns. Where risks to people had been identified, risk assessments were in place and action had been taken to manage the risks. Staff were aware of people’s needs and followed guidance to keep them safe. The service had systems to assess the quality of the service provided. Learning was identified and action taken to make improvements which improved people’s safety and quality of life. Systems were in place that ensured people were protected against the risks of unsafe or inappropriate care.

People were safe. Staff understood their responsibilities in relation to protecting people from the risk of harm. Staff had received regular training to make sure they stayed up to date with recognising and reporting safety concerns. The service had systems in place to notify the appropriate authorities where concerns were identified. People received their medicine as prescribed.

People told us they benefitted from caring relationships with the staff. There were sufficient staff to meet people’s needs and people received their care when they expected. Staffing levels and visit schedules were consistently maintained. The service had safe, robust recruitment processes.

Staff had a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and applied its principles in their work. The MCA protects the rights of people who may not be able to make particular decisions themselves. The registered manager was knowledgeable about the MCA and how to ensure the rights of people who lacked capacity were protected.

People told us they were confident they would be listened to and action would be taken if they raised a concern. We saw a complaints policy and procedure was in place.

Staff spoke positively about the support they received from the registered manager. Staff supervision and meetings were scheduled. Staff told us the registered manager was approachable and there was a good level of communication within the service.

People told us the service was friendly, responsive to people’s individual needs and well managed. People knew the managers and staff and spoke positively about them. The service sought people’s views and opinions and acted upon them.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 20 September 2018

The service was safe.

Risks to people were managed and assessments were in place to manage the risk and keep people safe.

There were sufficient staff deployed to meet people’s needs.

People received their medicines as prescribed.

Effective

Good

Updated 20 September 2018

The service was effective.

People were supported by staff who had the training and knowledge to support them effectively.

Staff received support and supervision and had access to further training and development.

Staff had been trained in the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and understood and applied its principles.

Caring

Good

Updated 20 September 2018

The service was caring.

Staff were kind, compassionate and respectful and treated people and their relatives with dignity and respect.

Staff gave people the time to express their wishes and respected the decisions they made. People were involved in their care.

The service promoted people’s independence.

Responsive

Good

Updated 20 September 2018

The service was responsive.

Care plans were personalised and gave clear guidance for staff on how to support people.

People knew how to raise concerns and were confident action would be taken.

People were treated as individuals and their diverse needs respected.

Well-led

Good

Updated 20 September 2018

The service was well- led.

The service had systems in place to monitor the quality of service.

The service shared learning and looked for continuous improvement.

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