Archived: Lifeways Community Care (Staffordshire)

We gave the provider short notice of our inspection because we wanted to make sure that the registered manager and staff would be available in the office to assist us by providing the information we required.

We asked the provider for contact details of people who used the service. We chose five people who used the service and we looked at their care records. We spoke with three relatives and one person who used the service to obtain their views about the care and support they received. We have included their comments in this report.

During this inspection we asked the following questions:

Is the service Responsive?

We saw that the provider had made improvements to the way in which they worked with other providers and relevant professionals. We saw that the provider responded quickly where the needs of people who used the service had changed. A health care professional told us,'I think the staff from Lifeways were marvellous. We worked alongside each other very well and when I asked for something to be done it was done straight away without delay.'

The provider had made improvements to the way in which complaints and concerns were managed. A new complaints procedure had been introduced and each person had been given a copy of this to keep for reference in their home. Relatives we spoke with told us that they knew how to make a complaint and felt that they would be listened to. A relative told us, 'I haven't needed to complain, but I would know who to contact if I had any concerns." Senior staff regularly visited the people who used the service presenting an opportunity to discuss any concerns people may have. The registered manager ensured that complaints were investigated fully and resolved where possible.

Is the service Well-Led?

We saw that the provider had made improvements to the way in which they obtained the views and suggestions of people who used the service and/or their relatives. The results of surveys were analysed and any areas of concern acted upon to ensure the provider continued to improve the service. Relative's we spoke with over the telephone generally felt that improvements had taken place. A relative told us, "I feel involved, we have had concerns but the company has made changes to make the quality of care and staffing better.'

When we looked at records relating to people's care and support needs we found that the information contained in the support plans in the office had not been reviewed or updated since 2013. Discussions with the manager and staff indicated that people's needs had been reviewed but this information had not been transferred to the copies of support plans in the office. We also noted that some information was missing. In one there were no records of medication administration (MAR) charts for people using the service. This meant that the quality monitoring of records had not been effective in ensuring that information was consistent and accurate.

People told us they had been involved in decisions about their care. When people were not able to fully contribute to a decision to be made, an assessment of what was in their best interests was completed.

People's welfare, safety and quality of life were checked through regular reviews, which checked how people's support was provided, recorded and reviewed. How well the provider listened to what relatives had to say and provided feedback on what they were doing in response needed to improve. Concerns raised by relatives were not responded to as a complaint and no feedback was provided in response to the annual surveys completed. The feedback we received told us that local health and social care professionals felt that the provider worked flexibly to respond to issues raised and made the changes in people's support plans requested.

On our second day of inspection, we visited two different areas where care and support was being provided. We found that care and support records held in the home were consistent with the records kept at the head office. We observed positive and respectful interactions between people and staff. The planning and allocation of staff ensured there was enough staff available to support people as needed. One relative told us, 'They spend time with him. Nothing is too much trouble, they are really good staff.' We also found regular involvement of relatives in ongoing decisions about people's care. One relative told us, 'I have been able to attend all the meetings held for my son and can look at his care plan which is in his home at any time.'

We found that the service had effective systems in place to monitor the quality and safety of care and support being provided. Staff told us that the training and support provided meant that they were able to look after and meet the needs of people they were supporting. The recruitment and selection processes ensured staff employed were suitable to be working with the vulnerable people care and support was being provided to.