Archived: Gable Healthcare Services Limited

People’s experience of using this service:

¿ Improvements were needed to ensure that the systems in place to monitor the quality and standard of the service were effective and consistently maintained.

¿ The provider had failed to display the rating of the last inspection as required.

¿ People’s care plans did not include people’s consent to care and did not have sufficient information to provide all staff with information to deliver person-centred care.

¿ People continued to be cared for safely and had developed positive relationships with staff.

¿ Staff were friendly, passionate about their work and caring; they treated people with respect, kindness, dignity and compassion.

¿ Staff knew their responsibilities as defined by the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA 2005). The provider was aware of how to make referrals if people lacked capacity to consent to aspects of their care and support and were being deprived of their liberty.

¿ People were protected from the risk of harm and received their prescribed medicines safely.

¿ Staff were appropriately recruited and there were enough staff to provide care and support to people to meet their needs.

¿ Staff had access to the support, supervision and training that they required to work effectively in their roles.

¿ People were supported to maintain good health and nutrition.

¿ People knew how to raise a concern or make a complaint and the provider had implemented effective systems to manage any complaints received.

¿ The service had a positive ethos and an open culture. The provider was approachable, understood the needs of people, and listened to staff and relatives.

¿ The service met the characteristics for a rating of “good” in three of the five key questions we inspected and a rating of “requires improvement” in two. Therefore, our overall rating for the service after this inspection was “requires improvement”.

More information is in the full report

We identified a breach of the Health and Social Care Act (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014 relating to the requirement as to display of performance assessments.

Details of action we have asked the provider to take can be found at the end of this report.

Rating at last inspection: Good (Report published 29 July 2016)

Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on previous rating.

Follow up: We will continue to monitor information and intelligence we receive about the service to ensure good quality is provided to people. We will return to re-inspect in line with our inspection timescales for Requires Improvement services.

There was a registered manager in post at the time of our inspection. 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 had care plans that were personalised to their individual needs and wishes. Records contained detailed information to assist care workers to provide care and support in an individualised manner that respected each person's individual requirements and promoted treating people with dignity.

People told us that they felt cared for safely in their own home. Staff understood the need to protect people from harm and knew what action they should take if they had any concerns. Staff understood their role in caring for people with limited or no capacity under the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

Staffing levels ensured that people received the support they required safely and at the times they needed. The recruitment practice protected people from being cared for by staff that were unsuitable to work in their home.

People received care from staff that were friendly and kind and who would go the extra mile to support people and their families. Staff had the skills and knowledge to provide the care and support people needed and were supported by a registered manager who was receptive to ideas and committed to providing a high standard of personalised care.

The registered manager was approachable and supportive. There were systems in place to monitor the quality of the service provided. Staff and people were confident that issues would be addressed and that any concerns they had would be listened to.