We carried out a review of the data available to us about Hazel Garth Reablement Hub on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Hazel Garth Reablement Hub, you can give feedback on this service.
Hazel Garth Reablement Hub is a domiciliary care agency registered to provide personal care. The service provides short term care and support to people following an illness or hospital stay with the aim of enabling people so they can continue living independently in their own homes. It provides a service to people over the age of 18 years. At the time of our inspection 12 people were receiving reablement support.
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 and relatives we spoke with were unanimous in their praise of the service provided and the staff. People told us staff were patient and kind and enabled them to do things at their own pace. Medicines management was safe which helped ensure people received their medicines as prescribed.
Our discussions with staff showed they knew people well. Staff were recruited safely and told us their induction was thorough and prepared them for their roles. We saw staff received the training and support they required to meet people’s needs. Staff had a good understanding of safeguarding and whistleblowing.
People’s needs were assessed before the service commenced. People received person-centred care and were involved in setting their own reablement goals and making decisions about their care and support. Risk assessments showed any identified risks had been assessed and mitigated. People’s nutritional and healthcare needs were met.
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 we spoke with raised no concerns but knew the processes to follow if they had any complaints and were confident these would be dealt with.
People and staff praised the way the service was run. They told us communication was very good. We saw systems were in place to monitor the quality of service delivery. The registered manager promoted a positive and inclusive ethos which focused on looking at ways in which the service could be improved for people. People, relatives and staff all said they would recommend the service to other people.