Attention: The information on this website is currently out of date and should not be relied upon..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


RMHCare Ltd, 22 Chapel Lane, Pinner.

RMHCare Ltd in 22 Chapel Lane, Pinner is a Homecare agencies specialising in the provision of services relating to caring for adults over 65 yrs, dementia, personal care and physical disabilities. The last inspection date here was 9th June 2018

RMHCare Ltd is managed by RMHCare Ltd.

Contact Details:

    Address:
      RMHCare Ltd
      M S Business Centre
      22 Chapel Lane
      Pinner
      HA5 1AZ
      United Kingdom
    Telephone:
      07397886836
    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 2018-06-09
    Last Published 2018-06-09

Local Authority:

    Harrow

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.

26th January 2018 - During a routine inspection pdf icon

RMHCare Ltd provides a range of services to people in their own home including personal care. People using the service had a range of needs such as learning and/or physical disabilities and dementia. At the time of our inspection 10 people were receiving personal care in their own homes.

Not everyone using RMHCare Ltd receives a regulated activity. CQC only inspect the service 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.

The service had a registered manager. 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 who used the service were confident in the ability of care workers to keep them safe. There were safeguarding systems and processes to support care workers to understand their role and responsibilities to protect people from avoidable harm. There were effective systems and processes in place to minimise risks to people. Care workers underwent appropriate recruitment checks before they started to work at the service. There were sufficient staff to meet people's needs safely. The service had processes in place to reduce the risk of infection and cross contamination. There were systems in place to ensure proper and safe use of medicines. Care workers had received medicines training.

Care plans were detailed and person-centred. People receiving care had their needs assessed across a wide range of areas and care plans included guidance about meeting their needs. Care workers understood the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and we found that people's consent was sought before the service provided care to them. Care workers were aware of the need to assess people's capacity to make specific decisions. Care workers were supported to have the skills and knowledge to carry out their role. They had received an induction before they could provide care to people. This was followed by regular training and support. People were supported to have sufficient amounts to eat and drink. Their care plans contained detailed information about food and drink.

Care workers had regular supervisions. They also received spot checks to monitor their performance when caring for people. Those who had been at the service for longer than 12 months had also received an appraisal. People receiving care were respected by staff and treated with kindness. People consistently described care workers in complimentary terms such as kind, compassionate, caring, and respectful.

People were involved in their care. Care plans reflected people’s needs, likes and dislikes and had been reviewed on a regular basis to ensure they remained up to date. Care workers knew people well and were able to describe to us how people liked to be supported. There was a complaints procedure which people and their relatives were aware of. People were provided with a service user guide that gave details of the process for reporting a complaint. People felt they would be listened to if they needed to complain or raise concerns. The Accessible Information standard was understood by the management team.

There were effective governance arrangements. There were systems to assess, monitor and improve the quality of the service provided.

 

 

Latest Additions: