Background to this inspection
Updated
14 April 2018
We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection checked whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.
This inspection took place on 28 February 2018 and 1 March 2018 and was announced. We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection visit because it is small and the manager is often out of the office providing care, so we needed to be sure that they would be in.
The inspection visit was carried out by one inspector.
Before the inspection, we asked the provider to complete a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well, and improvements they plan to make. This was returned to us by the provider.
We reviewed the information we held about the service. This included the action plan sent to us following the last inspection and statutory notifications regarding important events, which the provider is required to send us by law. We also reviewed information sent to us by Derby City Council who commission services from the provider. We contacted Derby Healthwatch; an independent consumer champion for people who use health and social care services. We used this information to help us plan this inspection.
During the inspection visit we spoke with three people who used the service and three relatives of people received care and support from the service. We spoke with seven members of staff in total; they included three support workers, a care co-ordinator, a manager and the provider.
We looked at the care records of four people who used the service. These records included care plans, risk assessments and records of the support provided. We also looked at three staff recruitment files and staff training records. We looked at records that showed how the provider managed and monitored the quality of service. These included quality assurance audits and checks, complaints and concerns, minutes of meetings, and a range of policies and procedures.
Updated
14 April 2018
Ellie Sunrise Healthcare Ltd is registered to provide personal care services to adults and older people living in their own houses and flats in the community.
At the last inspection in September 2016 this service was rated as ‘Requires Improvement’. We asked the provider to complete an action plan to show what they would do and by when to improve the key questions; safe, effective, responsive and well-led to at least good. You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection and our focused inspection, by selecting the 'all reports' link for Ellie Sunrise Healthcare Ltd on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.
This is the second comprehensive inspection of the service. This took place on 28 February 2018 and 1 March 2018, and was announced. At the time of our inspection 22 people were receiving care.
The service has improved its rating from Requires Improvement to Good in the key questions 'Is the service safe?’ ‘Is the service effective?’ ‘Is the service responsive?’ and 'Is the service well-led?' The overall rating of Ellie Sunrise Healthcare Ltd has improved to Good.
A registered manager was not in post. However, the provider had appointed a manager and they had begun the registration process. 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. We will continue to monitor this.
The provider had invested in systems and processes to ensure risks to people’s safety were assessed, managed and reviewed. A range of risk assessments were completed and preventative action was taken to reduce the risk of harm to people.
People continued to receive safe care. The provider, manager and staff team had received training on procedures to support and protect people from abuse and avoidable harm.
People were supported with their medicines in a safe way. People’s nutritional needs were met and they were supported to access healthcare support when needed. The service worked with other organisations to ensure that people received coordinated care and support.
The provider had sent us appropriate statutory notifications in a timely manner since our last inspection of the service. There were arrangements in place to make sure that action was taken and safety improved across the service.
Staff recruitment processes were followed that ensured people were protected from being cared for by unsuitable staff. There were enough staff to provide care and support to people to meet their needs safely. The provider had invested in staff induction and ongoing training and support for their role to work effectively.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. The provider, manager and staff demonstrated their understanding of the Mental Capacity Act, 2005 (MCA) and gained people's consent before providing personal care.
People were involved all aspects of their care from the development of their care plans, reviews and decisions made were documented. Care plans had been reviewed and updated people’s needs had changed. They were comprehensive information about people’s preferences, daily routines and diverse cultural needs and provided staff with clear guidance. Staff had a good understanding of people's needs and preferences and worked flexibly to ensure they were responsive.
People and their relatives were happy with staff who provided their personal care and had developed positive trusting relationships. People continued to be treated with dignity and respect, and their rights to privacy were upheld.
People, relatives and staff were encouraged to provide feedback about the service and it was used to drive continuous improvement. People and relatives all spoke positively about the staff team and how the service was managed. The provider had a process in place which ensured people could raise any complaints or concerns.
The provider was aware of their legal responsibilities and provided leadership and supported staff and people who used the service. The manager and staff team were committed to the provider’s vision and values of providing good quality care.
The provider had reviewed and updated their policies and procedures. The provider’s governance system to monitor and assess the quality of the service was used effectively to improve the service. Lessons were learnt when things went wrong and improvements made to prevent it happening again. The provider worked in partnership with other agencies to meet people’s needs.