You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 19 April 2019

About the service: Eniola Care Ltd is a private domiciliary care agency. The agency originally had an office in Newhaven but moved to their current office in Lewes in May 2018. The agency provides care, support and personal care to people living in their own homes. At the time of this inspection care was being provided for 29 people.

Not everyone using Eniola Care received a regulated activity; CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’; help with tasked related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also take account of any wider social care provided.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

People’s experience of using this service: People’s daily record sheets and Medicine Administration Records (MAR), were only returned to the office every two months. This meant that checks and audits could not be completed in a timely manner which resulted in some things being missed. For example, missing entries on MAR records. Also, a lack of detail with food and fluid intake with no specific measurements being recorded. Instructions for staff to manage a catheter were not recorded within a care plan. Although staff were aware of how to manage this recording of care provided required improvement.

There was no quality assurance for incidents or injuries. There had been no requests for written feedback from people, relatives or staff. The lack of auditing processes meant that best practice could not be captured and that there was no process to record lessons learned. These issues were discussed with the registered manager.

People told us they felt safe and were positive about staff. A person told us, “I feel much safer knowing that someone is checking on me as I worry about things.” A relative told us, “It’s very reassuring to know that (relative) has visits and when I go around there’re happy, clean and well cared for.” No safeguarding had been reported but all staff were aware of what to do if a situation arose. Staffing levels were sufficient. Medicines were managed safely.

Staff training was up to date and staff had the knowledge to meet people’s needs. Staff recruitment processes were robust. People were supported to eat and drink where needed although most people were supported in their homes by their families. Some people were living with dementia. Mental Capacity Assessments (MCA) had been completed by the local authority. No one was subject to Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

People and their relatives thought that staff were caring and that people were well cared for. Staff

interactions were observed and it was clear that all were very attentive and understanding of people's needs. People's dignity and privacy was promoted. People were asked discreetly

if they needed support with personal care. Staff told us curtains were drawn and doors closed when providing personal care.

The service responded well to people’s needs. Person centred care was evident although not everyone reported being involved in their care planning. People living with dementia were spoken to kindly and time given to them to express their wishes. A person who was visually impaired required more support from care staff and this was discussed with the registered manager. No complaints had been made about the service.

The registered manager was well thought of by people, residents and staff. It was clear that she had a good knowledge of people and their support needs.

Rating at last inspection: Eniola Care Ltd have not been inspected by CQC before.

Why we inspected: This was a planned, comprehensive inspection. The inspection took place in line with CQC scheduling guidelines for adult social care services.

Enforcement: Action we have told the provider to take is included at the end of the report.

Follow up: We will review the service in line with our methodology for ‘requires improvement’ services.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 19 April 2019

The service was safe.

Effective

Good

Updated 19 April 2019

The service was effective.

Caring

Good

Updated 19 April 2019

The service was caring.

Responsive

Good

Updated 19 April 2019

The service was responsive.

Well-led

Requires improvement

Updated 19 April 2019

The service was not always well-led.