We carried out a review of the data available to us about Social Care Reablement - Estuary House on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Social Care Reablement - Estuary House, you can give feedback on this service.
In February 2019, Devon County Council managed a transfer of care packages from another provider to Social Care Reablement – Estuary House. This is planned to be a short-term arrangement until an alternative provider can be found.
People’s experience of using this service:
The service had been very responsive. When a large number of packages of care were transferred from another provider at short notice, this was very well managed. People told us they had been fully involved in the development of their care plan and felt empowered and valued. One person said, “I’m over the moon with them. They’ve put the right carers in for me as an individual, these carers are brilliant.” People were kept well informed during the transfer of care. One person said, “They kept me informed to the highest degree” and, “When I had a query I spoke to [Registered manager’s name] and he sorted it, it’s been perfect ever since.”
People felt safe and comfortable when staff visited them in their home. People were kept safe as potential risks had been assessed and managed. There were enough staff to complete the planned visits.
People were treated with kindness and compassion by staff. People said, “They’re all very helpful” and, “They’re all absolutely lovely.”
People’s needs were met by staff who had received regular training and support. People were treated with respect and staff understood how to protect people’s rights.
People were involved in making decisions about the goals they wanted to achieve. People felt staff had helped them to progress and become more independent. Reablement goal plans contained up-to-date information about each person’s needs.
People were asked for their views about the service. The most recent feedback results showed people were happy with the service they were receiving.
There were effective systems in place to monitor the quality of the service.
The registered manager was committed to improving care where possible and had developed effective working relationships with other professionals and agencies.
The service met the characteristics for a rating of “Good” in all of the key questions we inspected. Therefore, our overall rating for the service after this inspection was “Good”.
More information is in the full report.
Rating at last inspection: Good (The report was published on 2 December 2016).
Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
Follow up: We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about this service until we return to visit as part of our re-inspection programme. If we have any concerns, we may inspect sooner.
This inspection took place on 3 and 4 November 2016 and was announced. The provider was given 48 hours’ notice because the location provides a service to people in their own homes and we needed to be sure people receiving a service, staff and the registered manager would be available to speak to us. One adult social care inspector undertook the inspection. This was the first inspection of the service since it had moved to its present address.
The service had a registered manager who also managed one of the provider’s other reablement services. 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 and staff told us the service was well-led. The service’s vision and values were described by staff as enabling and supporting people to regain their confidence and skills and respecting people’s rights, choices, privacy and dignity. Throughout our inspection we saw that staff put these values into practice. Staff spoke respectfully about people and cared about their welfare.
People said they felt safe with the staff when receiving care. The service undertook assessments to identify potential risks to people’s safety and plans were developed to minimise these risks. People were provided with specialist advice and support from physiotherapists and occupational therapists and were provided with equipment to help maintain their safety and independence. Staff had received training in safeguarding adults and knew how to report any concerns in line with the service’s safeguarding policy. People set themselves goals they wished to achieve for the period of time they were being supported and staff worked with people to increase their abilities and confidence. Staff were respectful of people’s choices and they and the registered manager had a good awareness of people’s rights under the Mental Capacity Act 2005.
The service employed sufficient numbers of safely recruited and well trained staff to meet people’s needs. People told us the staff were knowledgeable and skilled. Staff had received training in topics including safeguarding people, infection control, safe moving and handling, first aid, the Mental Capacity Act and respecting privacy and dignity. Several of the staff had worked for the service for many years. They said they did so because they felt the service had high standards, was professional and they were very well supported.
The registered manager explained that the service was not time specific as staff were responsive to people’s needs at each visit. This meant some visits might take longer than others. People told us they had never had a missed call, and if the staff were going to be much later than expected they always received a phone call to notify them. People were very positive about the way staff supported them, saying they were kind, caring and respectful. Staff performance was monitored through direct observation, supervisions and appraisals to ensure they were meeting people’s needs and following the guidance in people’s care plans. Regular staff meetings provided opportunities to review the development and continued improvement of the service. Staff told us the registered manager was very approachable and they were invited to share their views about the service.
People had no concerns over the care and support they received and they felt able to make a complaint if something was not right. The service had not received any complaints this year. They had however, received many letters of thanks and recent questionnaires showed a very high level of satisfaction with the service.
Audits were completed on a regular basis by the registered manager and Devon County Council quality team to monitor the quality of the service. Systems were in place for the reporting of notifications to CQC and incidents that involved people had been reported to us as required.