Attention: The information on this website is currently out of date and should not be relied upon..

Care Services

carehome, nursing and medical services directory


Austin Ben - Stoke, Brindley Court, Lymedale Business Park, Newcastle under Lyme.

Austin Ben - Stoke in Brindley Court, Lymedale Business Park, Newcastle under Lyme is a Homecare agencies specialising in the provision of services relating to caring for adults over 65 yrs, caring for adults under 65 yrs, caring for children (0 - 18yrs), dementia, mental health conditions, personal care, physical disabilities, sensory impairments and treatment of disease, disorder or injury. The last inspection date here was 8th March 2019

Austin Ben - Stoke is managed by Austin Ben Ltd.

Contact Details:

    Address:
      Austin Ben - Stoke
      Unit 7
      Brindley Court
      Lymedale Business Park
      Newcastle under Lyme
      ST5 9QA
      United Kingdom
    Telephone:
      03003650008
    Website:

Ratings:

For a guide to the ratings, click here.

Safe: Good
Effective: Good
Caring: Good
Responsive: Good
Well-Led: Good
Overall: Good

Further Details:

Important Dates:

    Last Inspection 2019-03-08
    Last Published 2019-03-08

Local Authority:

    Staffordshire

Link to this page:

    HTML   BBCode

Inspection Reports:

Click the title bar on any of the report introductions below to read the full entry. If there is a PDF icon, click it to download the full report.

7th February 2019 - During a routine inspection pdf icon

About the service:

Austin Ben - Stoke is a domiciliary care service that was providing personal care to 51 people living in their own homes at the time of the inspection. People had a range of support needs such as people living with mental health needs and older and younger adults.

People’s experience of using this service:

Quality assurance systems were in place to monitor people’s care. Staff knew people’s needs, but this needed to be included in some people’s care plans. The provider had already started to make these improvements following our feedback.

People felt safe and risks were planned for. There were enough staff to ensure people received timely support and staff were recruited safely. People received their medicines. Lessons were learned when things went wrong. People were protected from cross infection as appropriate measures were in place which staff followed.

People had their needs assessed and had access to other healthcare professionals when needed. People were supported to have food and drinks of their choice. The principles of the Mental Capacity Act (2005) were generally being followed and improvements made based on our feedback.

People were supported by kind and caring staff and were treated with respect. People had a choice and were able to make decisions about their care and were being supported to remain independent.

People received support that met their needs. People could complain when they needed to and complaints were investigated and dealt with. A policy and template care plans were in place ready for if someone needed to plan for their end of life wishes.

People, relatives and staff found the office staff and the registered manager approachable. The provider worked in partnership with organisations and sought feedback from people who used the service to make improvements.

Rating at last inspection:

The service was last rated as requires improvement overall (April 2017).

Why we inspected:

We planned the inspection based on the previous rating.

Recommendations:

• We have made a recommendation that quality assurance systems identify all areas for improvement.

Follow up:

We will continue to monitor the service and check our recommendations have been followed at our next inspection.

1st March 2017 - During a routine inspection pdf icon

The inspection took place on 1 March 2017 and was announced.

Austin Ben – Stoke is registered to provide personal care to people living in their own homes. There were 60 people using the service on the day of our inspection.

People did not always feel the care and support provided reflected their individual needs. Some people voiced frustration over the lack of predictable call times and regular staff. People, their relatives and staff gave mixed views about the management of the service. They did not always have confidence in the management team’s willingness to act on issues brought to their attention. Most staff we spoke with were concerned about the amount of travel time allocated between calls.

People were protected from the risks of harm and abuse. Staff understood how to recognise and report any actual or suspected abuse. The risks associated with people’s care and support needs had been assessed with them individually, and plans implemented to manage these. The provider had put procedures in place to ensure information on any changes in risk was shared with relevant staff. The provider followed safe recruitment practices to ensure staff were suitable to work with people. The majority of people received the support they needed to take their prescribed medicines.

Staff participated in a structured induction and an ongoing programme of training. They had the skills and knowledge needed to perform their job roles and meet people’s individual care and support needs. Staff sought people’s consent to care and respected their right to make their own decisions and choices. People’s nutritional needs were assessed and plans put in place to address these. Staff played a positive role in helping people to maintain good health.

Staff adopted a kind and compassionate approach towards their work. They took the time to get to know people well and treated them with dignity and respect. People and their relatives were encouraged to participate in care planning and decisions that affected them.

People’s care plans contained information about what was important to them as individuals, along with their individual care and support needs. Staff told us they had the time to read, and followed, these care plans. People and their relatives knew how to complain about the service. The provider had developed formal procedures for handling any such complaints.

The registered manager and location manager demonstrated a good understanding of the duties and responsibilities associated with their posts. The provider had developed quality assurance systems and procedures to enable them to assess, monitor and address the quality of the service people received.

 

 

Latest Additions: