Archived: Pulse - Newcastle

Updated 16 August 2017

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 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 Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014. We checked if improvements to meet legal requirements had been sustained following our last inspection in October 2016.

The inspection was announced and took place from 17 May to 19 July 2017. We gave 24 hours’ notice that we would be visiting as we needed to be sure that someone would be in at the office. The inspection was carried out by two adult social care inspectors 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.

Before the inspection, the provider had completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We reviewed the PIR and other information we held about the service prior to our inspection. This included the notifications we had received from the provider. Notifications are reports of changes, events or incidents the provider is legally obliged to send us within required timescales. We contacted commissioners of the service and Healthwatch, the local consumer champion for health and social care services.

During our inspection we had telephone contact with two people, six relatives and seven support staff to obtain their views about the service. We talked with staff at the office including the manager, the clinical governance lead, the regional nurse team leader, a branch community nurse and a case manager. We reviewed three people’s care records, staff training and recruitment records, and other records related to the management of the service.

Updated 16 August 2017

Pulse - Newcastle is a community health care agency that provides personal care and health support services to people in their own homes. At the time of the inspection, services were being provided to 23 people across the North East region.

The service had last been inspected in October 2016 when we had followed up on breaches of legal requirements relating to governance, medicines and safeguarding. Prior to this we had carried out a comprehensive inspection in February 2016 and rated the service as ‘Requires Improvement’.

At this inspection we judged improvements had been sustained and have changed our rating of the service. We found suitable systems were in place for reporting and responding to any safeguarding concerns. Administration and recording of medicines continued to be kept under close scrutiny to ensure staff followed safe practices.

The registered manager had left in recent months and the provider was in the process of recruiting a new manager. Appropriate arrangements had been made to manage the service in the interim.

People’s care was well-planned to reduce risks to their personal safety and welfare. New staff had been thoroughly vetted to assess their suitability before they were employed. There was sufficient staffing capacity and most people now had their own team of allocated support workers for consistency.

The staff were supervised, supported and given training that enabled them to provide effective care. Where it formed part of their care plan, people were provided with the necessary assistance to meet their health care and nutritional needs.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People and their relatives spoke positively about relationships with their support workers and their caring approach. They described being treated respectfully and with dignity.

Care plans were individualised and agreed in consultation with the person and their family. Where applicable, the service supported people to take part in social activities and access the community.

There were methods to assure the quality of the service, including seeking people’s views about their care experiences. Most people and their relatives were satisfied with how the service was run and it was evident complaints were taken seriously and acted on.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.