Archived: Housing & Care 21 - Plymouth

We found people were involved in decisions about their care and treatment and care workers asked people for their consent before providing care and support to them. There was documented evidence of people's signed consent to aspects of their care and treatment. This meant people's human rights were respected.

People told us they were well cared for and the staff were excellent "Really good carers, they are like a tonic to me." We found people's needs were assessed and they had support plans in place which reflected their individual needs. Risks were identified and records were kept of the care people had received. The staff were knowledgeable about people's needs, had read their support plans and efforts were made to provide consistent care by regular staff.

We spoke to staff who told us they were well supported and had access to one to one meetings, staff meetings and training opportunities to develop their skills.

We found there were policies in place in relation to the management of medicines and staff were trained to administer and record medicines for people they supported. This ensured people received the medicines they needed to keep them well.

There was a complaints policy which was followed and people felt safe raising concerns they might have.

We found that people had an assessment of their needs and a care plan that gave staff guidance in how to meet their needs in the way they preferred.

We found that the service had systems in place to protect vulnerable people from abuse. These included policies and procedures and staff training.

We found that staff had access to training to enable them to feel confident in their role and carrying out tasks. The first aid training did not include cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). Staff received support and supervision from management.

We found the service had a system in place to monitor the quality of the service provided to people. This included questionnaires and spot checks to ensure people who received services were able to express their views. People were unsure if they received feedback from quality assurance checks.