ECL Regaining Independence Service

Updated 27 October 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 was planned to check 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 comprehensive inspection took place on 7 June 2018 and was announced. We gave the service 24 hours’ notice of the inspection visit because the location provides a domiciliary care service. We needed to make sure that staff would be in the office for us to speak with and to arrange visits for us to observe care being given in people’s homes. Two inspectors carried out the inspection.

At the last inspection in March 2016 the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

Before the inspection, we reviewed information available to us about this service. We checked the information that we held about the service and the service provider. This included previous inspection reports and statutory notifications sent to us by the provider about incidents and events that had occurred at the service. A notification is information about important events, which the service is required to send to us by law. We used all this information to decide which areas to focus on during our inspection.

The registered provider had completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is information we require providers to send us at least once annually to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

We visited and spoke with two people in their homes and their support worker, a relative, an occupational therapist, two administrative staff, the registered manager, deputy manager and the provider’s head of quality and corporate governance, regional manager and director.

Following the inspection we spoke with three people and one relative by telephone and two staff. We also received feedback from a healthcare professional and a representative from the local authority’s commissioning team, both of whom have given their permission for their comments to be included in this report.

We reviewed a range of records relating to people’s care which included nine care plans, seven in the office and two in people’s homes. We also looked at four staff records which included information about their training, support and recruitment. We reviewed people’s Medication Administration Records (MARs). We looked at audits, minutes of meetings with people and staff, policies and procedures, accident and incident reports and other documents relating to the management of the service.

Updated 27 October 2018

A comprehensive inspection took place on 7 June 2018 and was announced. We gave the registered manager 24 hours' notice of the inspection because the location provides a domiciliary care service, we needed to make sure that staff would be in the office for us to speak with and to arrange visits for us to observe care being given in people’s homes.

ECL Regaining Independence Service is regulated to provide personal care to people in their own homes.

At the time of our inspection, approximately 94 people were using the service. People were referred to the service following hospital discharge or through social services. They follow a time limited, 're-enablement' programme of support which helped them to attain planned goals and regain their independence they had lost as the result of a specific event, such as an accident or through illness.

People receiving the service had a range of needs and told us they received personalised care that supported them to regain the independence.

The service was last inspected in March 2016. At our last inspection we rated the service good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

People and their relatives felt safe using the service and that staff were trustworthy. People received safe care and treatment. Risks to people’s health and safety were appropriately assessed and mitigated. Guidance was provided to staff on how to manage people's risks. People were supported to attain their goals and have maximum choice and control of their lives.

People received personalised care that supported them to regain the independence they had lost as the result of a specific event, such as an accident or through illness. People helped to set goals they aimed to achieve and were supported by staff in this. Complaints were managed and responded to appropriately.

Staff had been trained to recognise the signs of potential abuse and knew what action to take if they suspected abuse was taking place. Safe recruitment practices were in place so that suitable staff were engaged to work in the care profession. Staff were not always prompt in arriving at people's homes at the stipulated time, but it was recognised that some people needed additional support which varied from day to day and could delay the timings of visits. Accidents and incidents were reported and managed appropriately.

People's medicines were managed safely by trained staff. Many people using the service told us they managed their own medicines independently. For the people that had support to take their medicines, these were well managed by staff at the service. Staff supported people to have ready access to food and drink.

Depending on their needs, people using the service received care for up to nine weeks. Staff had a good understanding of people’s needs and how best to support them to achieve the desired outcomes. The provider’s remit was to support people to regain their levels of independence as much as was possible and they were encouraged in this process by staff when they visited people in their own homes. A relative explained how one staff member was on hand when their family member took a shower, but only helped when necessary. The relative said, “Staff are fantastic. They can’t do enough.”

People told us that staff treated them with dignity, respected their privacy and made them feel at ease. We saw staff treating and discussing people with dignity and respect and being considerate.

People were involved in their care and support and were encouraged to be active in giving feedback about how the service was run. People were asked for their views about the service through surveys sent by the provider. A large majority stated they were happy with the service and were likely to recommend it to friends or family. The service demonstrated good management and leadership and staff felt supported to raise any concerns they had.

People's health needs were monitored well and staff were responsive in seeking treatment.

The service was well led by the registered manager who had support from the provider in ensuring that quality assurance systems were effective. The provider invested in staff training and career development.