Archived: Relatives Relief Limited

Relatives Relief is a domiciliary care agency. It provides care and support to adults and older people living within their own homes. Not everyone who used the service received personal care. 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 there were 41 people using the service in receipt of personal care.

The last rating for this service was requires improvement (published 24 January 2019) and whist there were no breaches of regulation we made several recommendations in relation to medicines best practice, staff training, the mental capacity act and its application and strengthening of quality audit processes. 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.

People's experience of using this service and what we found

The quality and safety of the service had improved since our last inspection. The registered manager ensured the required actions were taken and improvements were made in line with their improvement plan.

People and their relatives spoke positively about staff and told us they were happy with the service they received. People told us they felt safe and had not experienced any abuse, neglect or discrimination. People were protected from the risk of avoidable harm because risks were identified, assessed and managed safely by staff.

People's medicines were safely managed, and people were protected from the risk of infections. Lessons were learnt from accidents and incidents. There were sufficient staff available to support people's needs and appropriate robust recruitment practices were in place.

Staff were supported through induction, training and supervision to ensure they had the knowledge and skills to support people safely. People were supported where this was part of their plan of care to meet their nutrition and hydration needs.

People had access to healthcare services and staff worked in partnership with health and social care professionals. People were supported to have 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.

People were supported by staff that were kind and caring. People were involved in making decisions about their care and support needs and had choice and control over their lives. People's privacy and dignity was respected, and their independence promoted.

People told us they knew how to make a complaint. People's communication needs were assessed and met and people were provided with information in a format that met their needs. There were now systems in place to assess and monitor the quality and safety of the service and to continuously learn and drive improvements.

The service worked in partnership with key organisations to plan and deliver an effective service.

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

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was Requires Improvement (published 24 January 2019). At this inspection enough, improvement had been made/sustained, and the provider was no longer in breach of regulation or the recommendations made. The service is therefore rated good at this inspection.

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

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.

¿ People and relatives told us they felt safe.

¿ Staff had a good knowledge of how to keep people safe from harm although risk assessments weren’t always in place to provide them with written guidance.

¿ People were supported to take their medicines in a safe way.

¿ Staff were recruited safely and appropriate checks were carried out before they started work at the service.

¿ Although not all staff had received updated training, people felt staff knew what they were doing and were competent.

¿ Staff lacked a comprehensive understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and when it should be applied

¿ Where lessons were learned, feedback was provided to staff to ensure continuous improvement.

¿ Quality assurance processes required improvement to ensure sufficient oversight of the service.

¿ People received care and support based on their individual needs and preferences.

¿ People told us they felt well cared for by staff who treated them with respect and dignity.

¿ People felt encouraged to maintain their independence.

¿ Systems were in place for people to raise complaints and concerns.

¿ Staff liaised with other health care professionals to ensure t their health needs were met

¿ Staff and people spoke positively about the registered manager. They felt well supported and were confident any concerns would be acted on promptly.

Rating at last inspection: Good (03 March 2016)

About the service: Relatives Relief is a domiciliary care agency registered to provide personal care. Relatives Relief supports people within and around Clacton on Sea. At the time of our inspection, the service was supporting 43 people and employed 36 members of staff.

Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the rating at the last inspection.

Follow up: We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any information of concern, we may inspect sooner

The service has a registered manager, who was also the provider. 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.

The agency had suitable processes in place to safeguard people from different forms of abuse. There were systems in place which provided guidance for staff on how to safeguard the people who used the service from the potential risk of abuse. Staff understood the various types of abuse and knew who to report any concerns to.

There were procedures and processes in place to ensure the safety of the people who used the service. People were safe because staff understood their responsibilities in managing risk. Where people required assistance to take their medicines there were arrangements in place to provide this support safely.

The agency provided sufficient numbers of staff to meet people’s needs and provide a flexible service. Staff were well supported to meet the needs of the people who used the service and had good relationships with people who used the service.

Staff received regular training relevant to their roles and responsibilities. They had the skills, knowledge and experience required to support people with their care and support needs.

Where people required assistance with their dietary needs there were systems in place to provide this support safely. People were supported with meal planning, preparation and eating and drinking.

People or their representatives, where appropriate, were involved in making decisions about their care and support. Care plans provided guidance for staff, had been tailored to the individual and contained information about how they communicated and their ability to make decisions.

Where care workers had identified concerns in people’s wellbeing there were systems in place to contact health and social care professionals to make sure they received appropriate care and treatment.

Care workers understood their roles and responsibilities in providing safe and good quality care to the people who used the service.

A complaints procedure was in place. People’s concerns and complaints were listened to, addressed in a timely manner and used to improve the service.

The agency had processes in place to monitor the delivery of the service. The service had a quality assurance system and shortfalls were addressed. People’s views were also obtained through annual surveys. The service analysed these and checked how well people felt the agency was meeting their needs.

People said they knew how to complain but that they had not needed to make any complaints. People were confident that the service management listened and acted on peoples on-going views about how they wanted their care and support provided.

Comments we received from people included, "The staff are excellent and the manager is wonderful.' 'The staff help me no end, they are very helpful and will ask us if we are satisfied with what they are doing for us.' 'Staff have the right attitude, they keep the care plan up to date and their communication is good.' 'The staff are good time keepers and they stay the full allocated time." 'I am well satisfied with the service.'

We found that staff were supported, trained and supervised to help ensure that people who were using the service received safe and appropriate care and support. Staff we spoke with told us they thought they had been properly recruited and trained. They also told us that they received very good support in their roles.