Attention: The information on this website is currently out of date and should not be relied upon..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


Georgina House Domiciliary Care Agency, Great Yarmouth.

Georgina House Domiciliary Care Agency in Great Yarmouth is a Homecare agencies specialising in the provision of services relating to caring for adults over 65 yrs, caring for adults under 65 yrs and personal care. The last inspection date here was 14th March 2020

Georgina House Domiciliary Care Agency is managed by Mrs Miranda Telfer.

Contact Details:

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 2020-03-14
    Last Published 2017-07-26

Local Authority:

    Norfolk

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.

3rd July 2017 - During a routine inspection pdf icon

The inspection took place on 3 July 2017 and was announced.

Georgina House Domiciliary Care Agency provides a domiciliary care service to people living in their own homes. At the time of the inspection they were providing a service to 32 people.

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.

We have made a recommendation about the management of medicines. This was because people had received their medicines as prescribed however associated records were not consistently or robustly completed.

The service had procedures in place that minimised the risk of employing people not suitable to work with those that used the service. The provider understood the importance of inducting, training and supporting staff and this was robustly delivered.

The provider was keen to ensure people were happy with the service they received and encouraged an open, communicative and proactive culture. The registered manager regularly delivered care and support to people whilst working alongside staff which ensured accessibility and transparency. Staff told us they felt supported, were happy in their roles and worked well as a team.

People received care and support from staff that were kind, considerate and respectful. They understood the importance of empowerment and worked in a way that ensured people were in control of the decisions made in relation to the care and support they received.

Staff had a good understanding of how to maintain people’s dignity and respected their choices, likes and preferences. Support was provided in a collaborative way that meant people’s independence was promoted, encouraged and supported.

Procedures were in place to help protect people from the risk of abuse and staff had knowledge of these. The risks to individuals had been identified, assessed and managed. Accidents and incidents, although few, had been recorded and appropriately actioned.

The CQC is required to monitor the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and report on what we find. Staff had received training in this legislation and had good knowledge of its application.

People had been involved in the planning of their care when they first started to use the service. The care and support delivered was as planned and met people’s needs in a person centred and unhurried manner. However, care plans did not always demonstrate the individualised care people received.

Where required, staff assisted people to meet their nutritional and healthcare needs. They respected people’s choice in regards to nutritional needs and prepared food to people’s liking. Staff had a good understanding of people’s health needs and assisted as required.

The service was well managed and the registered manager had a complete overview of it. Due to their regular contact with people who used the service, relatives and staff, the quality of the service was closely monitored and assessed. This also made the registered manager easily accessible, approachable and in a position to quickly manage any concerns people may have.

The people that used the service, and all others we spoke with, told us they would recommend the service. People received consistent care due to the same staff being in attendance. The service was reliable and caring. People spoke highly of the kindness of staff and the registered manager’s ability to ensure a good quality service was received.

 

 

Latest Additions: