• Services in your home
  • Homecare service

E2E Homecare

Overall: Requires improvement read more about inspection ratings

The Axis Building, Maingate, Kingsway North, Team Valley Trading Estate, Gateshead, Tyne And Wear, NE11 0NQ (0191) 820 3483

Provided and run by:
E2E Homecare Ltd

Report from 22 May 2024 assessment

On this page

Safe

Good

Updated 16 October 2024

People and staff gave positive feedback about safety. There were usually enough, safely recruited staff to meet people’s needs. Medicines were usually administered safely, however topical MARS (TMARs) were not available for the administration of topical medicines such as creams and ointments.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Learning culture

Score: 3

People confirmed that where things were not working well, the provider acted to improve things.

Most staff felt able to provide feedback and make suggestions about improvements. One staff member commented, “I can make suggestions or raise issues, and they are typically listened to, with some feedback provided.”

The provider had systems to log events happening within the service, such as incidents, accidents and complaints. However, there was limited information available to assess the effectiveness of these systems and identify lessons learnt.

Safe systems, pathways and transitions

Score: 3

People did not have any specific feedback about their transition into the service. They told us they met with staff to discuss their needs and the support they wanted. One relative said, “The first day they came, they did an assessment.”

The registered manager and staff worked with other professionals to help people receive the support they need. A staff member said, “lndividuals receive timely attention for any health changes.”

Partners did not raise any concerns about people’s transition into the home.

People’s care records identified other healthcare professionals involved in their care.

Safeguarding

Score: 3

People and relatives felt they received safe care from E2E Homecare. One relative commented, “As long as [relative] is happy that's what is important. I think [relative] is safe with the carers and she feels safe.”

Staff felt people were safe receiving care from E2E. A staff member commented, “People using the service are safe and cared for well with kindness, respect and dignity.” Staff knew how to raise concerns and said they felt confident to do so, if required.

The provider had an up-to-date safeguarding policy and systems to log and investigate safeguarding concerns. Care staff had completed safeguarding training as part of the Care Certificate. However, they had not completed any addition safeguarding training. Partners felt the service could engage more proactively with safeguarding and enable staff to complete additional training.

Involving people to manage risks

Score: 3

People said staff supported them to meet their needs. One relative told us, "They do everything they are supposed to do, everything that we ask them.”

Most staff said the registered manager and staff team worked together to ensure people received safe care that met their needs. A staff member told us, “We are a very hardworking team including manager and care coordinator, that can manage any kind of situation throughout.”

Care plans usually contained person-specific risk assessments. Where people had specific health needs, professionals had input into risk management. This included Speech and Language Therapy (SALT) assessments about adapted diets. However, care plans were not always available for some specific health needs. This meant staff did not always have enough guidance about people’s care and support needs.

Safe environments

Score: 3

People did not provide feedback about the environment.

Staff did not raise any concerns about the safety of their working environment and felt people were safe. A staff member commented, “People using the service are safe, cared for with dignity and respect.”

Staff completed a general environmental risk assessment when people accessed the service. This helped staff identify any potential hazards to people’s and staff member’s safety.

Safe and effective staffing

Score: 3

Most people and relatives said staff were usually consistent and reliable. “E2E are really good, they are on time every time they come out.” Relatives said care staff usually informed them if they were going to be late.

Staff felt there were enough staff to meet people’s needs. One staff member commented, “There are sufficient staff to meet people’s needs. The rota is always covered very well by the manager or co-ordinators.”

New staff were recruited safely. The provider completed a range of checks to help ensure new staff were suitable, including a Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) check.

Infection prevention and control

Score: 3

People and relatives told us staff followed infection prevention and control procedures (IPC) and used personal protective equipment (PPE). One person said, “IPC is good, they put gloves on as soon as they come into the house.”

Staff gave positive feedback about IPC. One staff member said, "I had lots of training which was provided by E2E Homecare Ltd. Some I did in face to face and some were online. I completed all my infection control training.”

The provider had an up to date infection prevention and control (IPC) policy. There were stocks of PPE available for staff to use.

Medicines optimisation

Score: 3

People received their medicines when they were due. One relative said, “[Relative] has [specific medicine], they are flexible enough to work around the medicines. I can't fault them with timekeeping. They always take into account [relative’s] medicines.

Although no TMARs were available to view during the inspection, the registered manager subsequently said these were completed.

Processes Medicines were usually administered as needed. The provider’s medicines policy had been recently reviewed to help ensure it was up to date. Medicines administration records (MARs) were completed accurately. Similar to the previous inspection, the provider continued to be unable to provide TMARs for recording the application of creams and ointments. This was not in line with the provider’s policy which stated to ‘use a topical medicines application record (TMAR) for recording the administration of topical preparations and expiry date information for topical medications.' The provider has systems to check whether people were receiving the correct medicines. The registered manager completed these checks and no issues had been identified.