Archived: Right at Home (Cheltenham to Malvern District)

' Is the service safe?

' Is the service caring?

' Is the service responsive?

' Is the service effective?

' Is the service well led?

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary is based on the people we spoke with who used the service, the staff who supported them and from looking at records.

At the time of our inspection 23 people recieved personal care from the servive. We spoke with five people who used the service and one relative. We spoke with four members of staff, the registered manager and the provider.

Is the service safe?

People told us they felt safe with the staff that cared for them. Staff understood how to safeguard the people they supported. However there were not adequate procedures in place to keep people safe.

Is the service effective?

It was clear from speaking with staff that they had a good understanding of the people's care and support needs and that they knew them well. Staff spoke about people as individuals.

We found that the provider did not have adequate systems in place that ensured new staff were inducted to the service appropriately.

Is the service caring?

We asked people for their opinions about the staff that supported them. What people told us was positive, one person said, 'All the staff are lovely'. A relative told us, 'They do a good job'.

People were supported by staff who demonstrated a clear understanding of their needs and preferences. People told us they were treated with respect and dignity by the staff. When we spoke with staff it was clear that they genuinely cared for the people they supported.

Is the service responsive?

Staff told us that the registered manager provided them with upto date information. Staff told us they knew who they were providing care for. Four people we spoke with told us that they had never had a call missed, one person told us that they had one call missed at the begining of their care, however this has not happened since.

Is the service well-led?

Staff told us the registered manager listened to them. Staff were clear about their roles and responsibilities. Were staff had commented within a survey with ways to improve the service this had not always been acted upon.

The provider told us that they had sent out questionnaires to the people who used the service and their relatives. Where comments had been made these had been acted upon. This meant that the provider had taken appropriate steps to gather people's views of the running the home and had acted upon them.

The provider did not have a system of audit to improve the quality of its service and minimise the risk that people would receive inappropriate care.

People we spoke with were complimentary about the care and support that they received. People said: 'I can't fault them'. 'The agency has been a lifeline. Having the carers is wonderful'.

We found that proper steps had been taken to ensure that individualised care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure people's safety and welfare.

The provider needed to ensure that management staff received training about safeguarding procedures to ensure that people were not placed at risk of harm.

Staff had been recruited in an appropriate way and checks had been undertaken that ensured they were suitable to care for vulnerable people.

The provider had systems of audit in place to enable them to monitor the quality of the service provided to ensure that people received appropriate care and treatment.