We carried out a review of the data available to us about Everycare (Central Surrey) on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Everycare (Central Surrey), you can give feedback on this service.
Everycare (Central Surrey) Ltd is a domiciliary care provider. It provides personal care to people living in their own homes. Not everyone who used the service received personal care. The Care Quality Commission (CQC) only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also consider any wider social care provided. At the time of our inspection, the service was providing the regulated activity of ‘personal care’ to 31 people.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
Staff knew the people they supported well, and they had the necessary skills and experience to provide good care. Staff were proud to work for the service and received comprehensive training. They knew how to raise concerns if they believed people to be at risk of or experiencing harm.
People received a consistent and reliable service. They were able to make changes to their plan of support when needed. People and relatives said that the management team were very approachable.
There was good, consistent leadership of the service with robust oversight. Regular auditing and governance enabled management to quickly identify issues in the quality of service. The registered manager was very visible and was involved in all aspects of the service.
People had maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection and update
The last rating for this service was requires improvement (published 27 June 2019) and there was a breach of regulation. The provider completed an action plan after the last inspection to show what they would do and by when to improve. At this inspection we found improvements had been made and the provider was no longer in breach of regulation.
Why we inspected
We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection of this service on 24 April 2019. A breach of legal requirements was found. The provider completed an action plan after the last inspection to show what they would do and by when to improve good governance.
We undertook this focused inspection to check they had followed their action plan and to confirm they now met legal requirements. This report only covers our findings in relation to the Key Questions Safe, Effective and Well-led which contain those requirements.
The ratings from the previous comprehensive inspection for those key questions not looked at on this occasion were used in calculating the overall rating at this inspection. The overall rating for the service has changed from Requires Improvement to Good. This is based on the findings at this inspection.
You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Everycare (Central Surrey) Ltd on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.
Everycare (Central Surrey) is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal and live in care to 50 people living in their own houses and flats. It provides a service to older adults, some of whom are living with dementia. Not everyone using Everycare (Central Surrey) receives a 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 take into account any wider social care provided.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People and their relatives told us they felt safe, and staff were aware of their role in safeguarding people from abuse. However, risks to people were not always appropriately recorded, and the recording and auditing of medicines also required improvement. There were a sufficient number of safely recruited staff to meet people’s needs. Accidents and incidents were not always recorded appropriately.
People’s rights were not always protected in line with the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Staff were up to date with mandatory training and received regular supervision. There was an effective communication system in place and referrals to healthcare professionals were made where required. The service completed pre-assessments to ensure they could meet people’s needs and followed national guidance and best practice.
People and relatives told us staff were extremely kind and caring and treated them with dignity and respect. People were involved in decisions around their care and encouraged to be independent where possible.
Although people’s care plans were not personalised, people were receiving personalised care. Complaints were dealt in line with the provider’s policy. Care plans did not include people’s end of life wishes. The service was not delivering end of life care to anyone at the time of the inspection.
People and relatives felt the management team were approachable and staff felt valued. Quality audits were not always robust and did not identify issues we found during our inspection. People and their relatives were regularly asked for their feedback on the service, and events to reduce social isolation were organised by the registered manager. There were links to local organisations where best practice, knowledge and training resources. For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk.
Rating at last inspection
At the last inspection the service was rated Good (9 September 2016.
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
Follow up
We will follow up on breaches and recommendations made and any improvements required at our next inspection.
This service provides domiciliary care and support in people's own homes within a ten mile radius of the Guildford area. A range of services are available, including personal and social care, live in and 24 hour care, rehabilitation and home from hospital support. Domestic services are also available, such as laundry and shopping.
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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
At the previous inspection on 3 June 2013, the agency was compliant with regulations. At this inspection the regulations were met.
People told us they were happy with the service provided and were notified of changes to staff and the timing of their care. The designated tasks were carried out to their satisfaction and the staff team really cared. They thought the service provided was safe, effective, caring, responsive and well led.
The records were kept up to date and covered all aspects of the care and support people received, their choices and identified and met their needs. They contained clearly recorded, fully completed, and regularly reviewed information that enabled staff to perform their duties very well.
Staff were knowledgeable about the people they gave support to and the way people liked to be supported. They also worked well as a team when it was required, such as calls that may require two staff members. Staff provided care and support in a professional, friendly and supportive way that was focussed on the individual and they had appropriate skills to do so. They were well trained, knowledgeable and accessible to people using the service and their relatives. Staff said the organisation was a good one to work for and they enjoyed their work. They had access to good training, support and there were opportunities for career advancement.
People and their relatives were encouraged to discuss health and other needs with staff and had agreed information passed on to GP’s and other community based health professionals, as appropriate. Staff protected people from nutrition and hydration associated risks by giving advice about healthy food options and balanced diets whilst still making sure people’s meal likes, dislikes and preferences were met.
The agency staff knew about the Mental Capacity Act and their responsibilities regarding it.
People told us the office, management team and organisation were approachable, responsive, encouraged feedback and frequently monitored and assessed the quality of the service provided.
People confirmed that their care needs had been identified, discussed and agreed with staff. We heard from a person receiving care "They do what I want and I am involved in discussions." Staff were fully aware of their responsibilities in meeting such needs. We were told by people receiving services they felt safe with staff and we found staff understood the need to safeguard vulnerable people.
There were effective recruitment procedures, which ensured that only suitably skilled staff were employed. One person said "Staff are certainly trained."
People were able to feed back on the quality of the services provided and the staff assessed and monitored quality of service as an ongoing process.