The inspection was announced and was carried out on 14 and 15 April 2015 by one inspector and was supported by an expert by experience who telephoned people and relatives for their views.
Everycare (West Kent) Ltd is a domiciliary care agency providing personal care to people in their own homes in and around the Tunbridge Wells area. Some people using the service are older people including people who may live with Dementia, or with learning and/or physical disabilities.
There was a registered manager in post. 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.
Staff were trained in how to protect people from abuse and harm. They knew how to recognise signs of abuse and how to report any concerns. People told us, “I felt safe from day one; It’s a relief having them around”.
Risk assessments were centred on the needs of the individual. They included clear measures to reduce identified risks and guidance for staff to follow to make sure people were protected from harm. Accidents and incidents were recorded and monitored to identify how risks of re-occurrence could be reduced.
There were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff to meet people's needs. Staffing levels were calculated according to people’s changing needs and travel time was taken into account to reduce lateness of visiting calls. The manager followed safe recruitment practices.
Staff were trained in the safe administration of medicines. Records relevant to the administration of medicines were monitored to ensure they were accurately kept and medicines were administered safely to people according to their needs.
Staff knew each person well and understood how to meet their support needs. People told us, “They are well aware and respectful of my specific needs”. Each person’s needs and personal preferences had been assessed before care was provided and were continually reviewed. This ensured that the staff could provide care in a way that met people’s particular needs and wishes.
Staff had completed the training they needed to care for people in a safe way. They had the opportunity to receive further training specific to the needs of the people they supported. All members of care staff received regular one to one supervision sessions and were scheduled for an annual appraisal to ensure they were supporting people based on their needs.
All care staff and management were trained in the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and were knowledgeable about the requirements of the legislation.
Staff sought and obtained people’s consent before they provided care. When people declined, their wishes were respected and staff reported this to the manager so that people’s refusals were recorded and monitored.
Staff provided meals when appropriate and ensured they were well balanced to promote people’s health. Staff knew about people’s dietary preferences and restrictions.
People told us that staff communicated effectively with them, responded to their needs promptly and treated them with kindness and respect. People were satisfied with how their care and treatment was delivered.
Clear information about the service, the management, the facilities, and how to complain was provided to people. Information was available in a format that met people’s needs when they had visual impairment.
People’s privacy was respected and people were assisted with their personal care needs in a way that respected their dignity.
People were referred to health care professionals when needed and in a timely way. Personal records included people’s individual plans of care, likes and dislikes and preferred activities. The staff promoted people’s independence and supported them during activities. They encouraged people to do as much as possible for themselves.
People’s individual assessments and care plans were reviewed regularly with their participation or their representatives’ involvement. People’s care plans were updated when their needs changed to make sure they received the care and support they needed.
The provider took account of people’s complaints, comments and suggestions. People’s views were sought and acted upon. The provider sent questionnaires regularly to people to obtain their feedback on the quality of the service. The results were analysed and action was taken in response to people’s views.
Staff told us they felt valued under the manager’s leadership. The manager notified the Care Quality Commission of any significant events that affected people or the service. Quality assurance audits were carried out to identify how the service could improve and the manager had an action plan for making the improvements.