You are here

Archived: Eastview Healthcare Services Ltd Good

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

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

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 5 December 2018

This inspection took place on 10 and 15 October 2018 and was announced.

Eastview Healthcare Services Ltd was registered with the Care Quality Commission in October 2017 and this was the first inspection of the service.

Eastview Healthcare Services Ltd is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats in the community. The service is registered to provide ‘Personal Care’ to older and younger adults, children and people with mental health and learning disabilities.

Not everyone using Eastview Healthcare Services Ltd receives 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 consider any wider social care provided.

The registered provider was also the registered manager of 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 were protected from the risk of harm. Staff had been trained in safeguarding people and understood how to report any concerns of abuse. Risks to people’s safety were assessed to ensure preventative action was taken to reduce the risk of harm to people.

People were supported with their medicines in a safe way. People’s nutritional needs were met, and they were supported with their health care needs when required. The service worked with other organisations to ensure that people received coordinated care and support.

People were protected by safe recruitment procedures to ensure staff were suitable to work in care services. There were enough staff to meet people's needs. Staff received training for their role and ongoing support and supervision to work effectively.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. The registered manager and staff demonstrated their understanding of the Mental Capacity Act, 2005 (MCA) and gained people's consent before providing their care and support.

People were involved all aspects of their care. People’s care plans information available about people’s preferences, daily routines and diverse cultural needs. Staff had a good understanding of people's needs and preferences and worked flexibly to ensure they were met.

People and their relatives were happy with staff who provided their personal care and had developed positive trusting relationships. People were treated with dignity and respect, and their rights to privacy were upheld.

People, relatives and staff were encouraged to provide feedback about the service they all spoke positively about the staff team and how the service was managed. The comments we read in the satisfaction surveys were very complimentary. For example, one relative wrote, ‘The staff managed to come out during the rain, snow and ice and in all weathers. Thank you very much for the care and compassion shown to [Name of person] during the five weeks he received care. This made it possible to stay at home, which is where he always wanted to be.’

The registered manager and staff team were committed to following the vision and values of the service in providing good quality care. The registered manager was aware of their legal responsibilities and provided effective leadership and support to staff. Quality assurance systems were used to monitor and assess the quality of the service to drive continuous improvement. The registered manager worked in partnership with other agencies to meet people’s needs.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 5 December 2018

The service was safe.

Staff were trained in safeguarding and people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm.

Risks associated with people�s needs were assessed and managed safely. People were supported with their medicines safely.

Staff were recruited safely and there were enough staff to provide care and support to people.

Staff understood their roles and responsibilities in relation to infection control and hygiene.

Accident and incidents were responded to appropriately and lessons were learnt to mitigate the risks of further incidents.

Effective

Good

Updated 5 December 2018

The service was effective.

People�s needs were assessed, to ensure they received the care and support they needed. People were supported to maintain their nutrition, health and well-being where required.

People received support from a staff team that had the necessary training, skills and knowledge. System were in place to provide staff with on-going support.

People made daily choices and decisions. Staff sought people�s consent and understood people�s rights. Capacity assessments were used to identify the level of support people needed to make decisions.

Caring

Good

Updated 5 December 2018

The service was caring.

People were cared for by staff that were caring, friendly and kind. People were supported to make decisions about how they wanted their care and support provided. People were treated with dignity and respect, and staff ensured their privacy was maintained.

People�s views about the service were sought to review the service and drive improvements.

Responsive

Good

Updated 5 December 2018

The service was responsive.

People�s needs were assessed. The care plans were person centred and provided staff with clear guidance on how people wanted their care and support to be delivered. Staff respected people's diverse cultural needs, wishes and views.

Systems were in place to respond to any complaints. People were confident that any concerns raised would be dealt with appropriately.

Well-led

Good

Updated 5 December 2018

The service was well led.

The registered manager understood their role and responsibilities.

The registered manager provided strong leadership and the staff team worked together to provide high quality care.

Quality assurance system were used to continually monitor all aspects of the service.