Attention: The information on this website is currently out of date and should not be relied upon..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


HELPR Limited, Ashley Avenue, Epsom.

HELPR Limited in Ashley Avenue, Epsom is a Homecare agencies specialising in the provision of services relating to caring for adults over 65 yrs, caring for adults under 65 yrs, dementia and personal care. The last inspection date here was 5th April 2019

HELPR Limited is managed by HELPR Limited.

Contact Details:

    Address:
      HELPR Limited
      Global House
      Ashley Avenue
      Epsom
      KT18 5AD
      United Kingdom
    Telephone:
      01372232140
    Website:

Ratings:

For a guide to the ratings, click here.

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

Further Details:

Important Dates:

    Last Inspection 2019-04-05
    Last Published 2019-04-05

Local Authority:

    Surrey

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.

25th February 2019 - During a routine inspection

About the service:

HELPR Limited is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats. It provides a service to older adults, some of whom are living with dementia.

Not everyone using HELPR Limited receives regulated activity; CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also take into account any wider social care provided. For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

People’s experience of using this service:

Relatives told us they felt their family members were safe, and staff were aware of their role in safeguarding people from abuse. However, risks to people were not always appropriately recorded and managed, and the recording of medicines also required improvement. There were a sufficient number of staff to meet people’s needs, but safe recruitment checks had not always been evidenced.

People’s rights were not always protected in line with the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and pre-assessments had not been completed to ensure that the service could meet people’s needs. Referrals to healthcare professionals had also not always occurred when needed. However, the registered manager has provided evidence that this is now being implemented throughout the service following the inspection. Staff training and supervision policies needed to be improved, but the service’s use of technology encouraged good communication amongst staff.

People and relatives told us staff were extremely kind and caring, and had become more like friends to them. People had been involved in reviews and decisions around their care. Staff respected people’s privacy and dignity, and encouraged their independence where possible.

People were receiving person centred care in addition to their care plans being person centred. The service had not received any complaints, but people were aware how to raise a concern if they needed to. People’s end of life wishes had not been explored or recorded. Pre assessments had also not been completed. The registered manager said they would look to implement this in the service.

People and relatives felt the management team were approachable and staff felt valued. Quality checks needed to be recorded to ensure the service was in line with their quality management policy. The registered manager was in the process of getting an annual survey ready to send to people, relatives and staff to gather feedback to aid improvement in the service. The directors of the service took a proactive approach to working in partnership with other agencies in order to create a social enterprise.

Rating at last inspection:

This is the service’s first inspection and therefore does not have a previous rating.

Why we inspected:

This was a scheduled comprehensive inspection. We inspect services that are newly registered with the commission within a year.

Follow up:

We found one breach of regulation during our inspection. We have made recommendations about the recording of risks, pre assessments and quality audits, and staff processes around training and supervisions. We will follow this up during our next inspection, and have requested for the local authority's quality improvement manager in the area to work alongside the service. Please see the ‘action we have told the provider to take’ section towards the end of the report.

 

 

Latest Additions: