• Services in your home
  • Homecare service

Cavell Healthcare

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Suite 6, Wensum Mount Business Centre, Low Road, Norwich, NR6 5AQ (01603) 340044

Provided and run by:
Eastern Specialist Services Limited

Important: This service was previously registered at a different address - see old profile

Latest inspection summary

On this page

Background to this inspection

Updated 21 May 2019

The inspection

• We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team

• The inspection was carried out by an inspector, an assistant inspector and an expert by experience. An expert by experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

Service and service type

• Kare Plus Norwich is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own homes. It provides a service to older people and younger adults. Some people who use the service may be living with dementia, have a learning disability, a mental health need, a sensory impairment or a physical disability.

• At the time of our inspection, 56 people were receiving the regulated activity of personal care.

• The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

Notice of inspection

• We gave the service two working days’ notice of the inspection site visit to ensure staff would be available.

• The inspection started 24 April 2019 and ended on 26 April 2019. We visited the office location on 24 April 2019 to see the registered manager and office staff and to review care records and policies and procedures.

What we did

• Prior to our inspection we reviewed and analysed the information we held about this service. This included reviewing statutory notifications the service had sent us. A notification is information about important events which the provider is required to send us by law.

• We viewed the information sent to us by stakeholders including health professionals and commissioning bodies such as the local authority and continuing healthcare.

• Feedback was also requested from the local authority quality assurance team and social and healthcare professionals who had had recent contact with the service.

• A Provider Information Return (PIR) is key information providers can send us on their service, what they do well and improvements they plan to make. A PIR was not received for this service as we had not requested one prior to our inspection.

• We spoke with four people who used the service and nine relatives.

• We spoke with the registered manager, the deputy manager, the care coordinator, one field care supervisor and two home care workers.

• We reviewed the medicines administration record (MAR) charts for two people. We also reviewed the care planning documents for seven people who used the service. Documents associated with the management of the service were also viewed.

• After our inspection, we gave the provider 48 hours to submit any further documents to demonstrate that they were meeting the fundamental standards. Extra information was submitted within the time frame and has been used as evidence for this inspection.

Overall inspection

Good

Updated 21 May 2019

About the service

• This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own homes. At the time of this inspection, 56 people were receiving a service from Kare Plus Norwich.

People’s experience of using this service

• People received a service that was considerate of their needs, respectful and caring.

• All the people we spoke with who used the service told us they were happy with the care they received and would recommend the service to others.

• People’s needs had been assessed and they had been fully involved in the planning of the care and support they received. Their consent had been sought and adhered to the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

• The care delivered was person-centred and met people’s needs. This included where people needed support with their medicines, nutrition or accessing health services.

• People told us that staff were caring, kind and compassionate in their approach. People felt respected and care planning was done in a way that put people in control of the support they received. People’s dignity was maintained, and their independence encouraged.

• The service had an open and supportive culture, and this had had a positive impact on the people who used the service.

• People told us the service was well-managed, that they were listened to and that any concerns they may have were dealt with quickly and efficiently.

• Staff had been safely recruited and there were enough of them to provide patient, unhurried and individualistic care to people.

• The morale of staff was high, and they were motivated. They received ongoing training and support. This had benefited those that used the service who told us staff were happy in their work and that they had confidence in staff’s abilities.

• Procedures were in place to help keep people safe, such as those in relation to safeguarding and risk management.

• The quality monitoring system the provider had in place was effective at improving the service and people were involved in this.

• The management team and staff demonstrated commitment and passion in the work they did, and the registered manager was keen to listen to suggestions to further improve the service.

• The provider had good oversight of the service and attended the service’s office each day so was fully involved in the running of the service.

• Regulatory requirements had been met.

• For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection

• The provider had changed its address since our last inspection and this was the service’s first inspection under the new registration . The service was rated good under its previous registration.

Why we inspected

• This was a planned comprehensive inspection based on the length of time since its new registration.

Follow up

• We will continue to monitor this service and take any actions as necessary.