You are here

Enviva Care Limited Outstanding

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

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 28 July 2014
Date of Publication: 12 August 2014
Inspection Report published 12 August 2014 PDF | 83.8 KB


Inspection carried out on 28 July 2014

During a routine inspection

An adult social care inspector carried out this inspection. The focus of the inspection was to answer five key questions; is the service safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led?

On the day of the inspection there were 20 people using the service. As part of the inspection we met with one person in their home, spoke with one person by telephone and spoke with two people�s relatives. We also spoke with the registered manager, the registered provider, four staff and two health professionals. We reviewed records relating to the management of the service which included four people�s care plans and daily care records. We reviewed the recruitment records for three members of staff.

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary describes what people using the service, their relatives and the staff told us, what we observed and the records we looked at.

Is the service safe?

We found the service to be safe as people we spoke with told us that they felt safe in the care of the staff. One person�s relative told us �We had confidence X was safe and well cared for.� Staff had received relevant training in how to safeguard vulnerable adults at risk and had access to written guidance. They could ring the provider out of hours for advice and support as required.

The provider had a recruitment policy in place that had been followed. Relevant checks had been completed in relation to new staff before they started work to ensure their suitability for their role.

CQC monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards which applies to domiciliary care providers. While no applications have needed to be submitted, proper policies and procedures were in place to ensure people�s rights were protected.

Is the service effective?

The service was effective. People told us that they had been involved in the assessment of their care needs and that they had been able to express their preferences about how they wanted their care to be provided. Staff told us that they promoted people�s right to make choices. People�s care plans demonstrated that consideration had been given to people�s choices and preferences. One person we spoke with told us that the carer had noted their preference about food and ensured that this was followed.

We found that risks to people had been identified and there were plans in place to manage them. People�s right to make lifestyle choices had been respected whilst the associated risks had been identified and managed.

Is the service caring?

We found the service to be caring in the manner in which people� care was provided. We spoke with people and their relatives who told us that staff treated them with dignity and respect when they provided their care. One person told us �Yes, I am treated with dignity and respect.� Another told us �Staff use my preferred name to address me.� When we met with a person in their home we observed that staff respected the fact that they were working in the person�s home whilst they provided the service.

We spoke with one person who told us staff were �Very good at meeting my care needs.� Another person�s relative told us. �They have supported me in coming to terms with X�s diagnosis.� People and their relatives told us that staff had a genuine interest in them. The impact of this was that people felt that staff cared about their welfare and wellbeing.

Is the service responsive?

We spoke with a person�s relative who told us that the service had been responsive to their relative�s needs. They told us that a care package had been set up within hours of them making contact with the service in a crisis.

When people had required medical care this need had been identified and the relevant professionals contacted.

We saw evidence that learning from incidents had taken place. Following a recent incident the provider had reflected upon their practice to see if there were any areas that could be improved further. We noted that following any accidents or incidents a form had been completed. These were then reviewed by the provider to ensure that they had oversight of incidents and to enable them to identify any learning points.

Is the service well-led?

We found the service to be well-led as the provider had ensured that they sought people�s views through regular visits to people�s homes and an annual survey. In addition the provider had regular telephone contact with people. One person told us �Staff ring up and check on progress.� Another person�s relative said �Our views have been sought.�

The provider had ensured that learning took place from incidents in order to identify if areas of the service could be improved.