Archived: K & S Home Care Services

We spoke with 19 people who used the service or their relatives, and asked them about the care they or their family member received. We also spoke with six members of care staff to gain their views of the service. We reviewed some of the records relevant to the running of the service.

Throughout this inspection we focused on these five key questions; is the service safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led?

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary describes what we observed, the records we looked at and what people who used the service and the staff told us.

Is the service safe?

Staff were regularly trained in essential areas such as ensuring people who used the service were safe from harm or abuse, management of medicines and moving and handling in order to help keep people safe.

One person commented, 'I am quite happy, they [staff] are on time and are very pleasant, they hoist me very well and safely. They are well trained in this. I have no complaints.'

Improvements had been made to the effectiveness of record keeping and care planning since the last inspection. We also found the provider had their own in-house training officer who provided training for staff in areas such as the safe moving and handling of people. Induction training was provided for people prior to commencing work, which enabled them to gain the skills required prior to delivering care and support to people who used the service.

Is the service effective?

Whilst some people who used the service told us the care workers sometimes arrived late for their calls, all of the people we spoke with were satisfied with the overall service.

People told us they were happy with the care they received. One person commented, 'The care provided is very positive, I have no problems at all, they [staff] offered me extra support after my stay in hospital when I needed it.' Another person said, 'The staff do their best, and although they are not always on time although their care is very good. The staff are very friendly, and always do what you ask them to do.'

Is the service caring?

We spoke with relatives of people who used the service and asked them if they felt their family member was safe and well cared for by the staff. One relative told us, 'They've been fine, seems to be going alright. If my partner wasn't happy they would say so. They are sometimes a bit late but we are flexible, there are no problems caused.' Another person added, 'I am quite happy, they [staff] are on time and are very pleasant, they hoist me very well and safely. The staff seem well trained. I have no complaints.'

Is the service responsive?

We found people's needs were met. One person told us, 'It is a very good service, I can honestly say I've not got a bad word to say about any of them [staff]. They helped me when I had a fall, and stayed with me until my family and medics arrived.'

Staff told us about an on call system where they were able to contact a manager or an on-call member of staff at any time for advice or assistance in the provision of care.

We saw replies to a survey submitted by people who used the service. The surveys showed people had expressed a high level of satisfaction in relation to the service they received. This was supported by the majority of positive responses we gained when we spoke with people who used the service.

Is the service well-led?

We asked people who used the service, their relatives and staff whether they felt the service was well led by the management team. A person who used the service told us, 'They have been fine right from the start. Their staff are occasionally late but it's not a problem, the service is fine. They have had a turnover of staff, but now we receive regular carers and my partner is very happy with their care. We have a review every three months and we see the owner or one of the managers. If anything is wrong they step in.'

Staff spoke positively about the management of the service. One staff member told us, 'I have no problems, but if I had issues I would be confident to share them with the managers.' Another staff member told us, 'I enjoy working for the company. The support and supervision is good and the advice is there when I need it.'

One person told us, 'A couple of the staff haven't been very respectful; I've had to raise it with the manager.' One staff member said, 'People's wishes are mostly respected but not always.'

A relative told us, 'There are the odd hiccups but nothing drastic. Care has improved a little bit.'

We found that the provider had made improvements in care planning for people who used the service. However; the provider had not fully completed this process.

We saw that checks were made before staff started working for the service.

One staff member told us, "There's not enough management support.'

We looked at the staff training matrix and found there were gaps in staff training.

Two people who used the service told us, "It could be better. I couldn't recommend the service,' and, 'They're not in the top division. I'd say they were adequate.'

We found the service had not completed care plan reviews in line with their own schedules and had not identified risks according to each person's individual care requirements.

We judged that the service had made improvements related to record keeping.

A relative of a person using the service told us, 'Staff provide a good standard of support to my relative. The majority of the time I felt that staff knew what they were doing when they cared for my relative."

We looked at the care plans and associated risk assessments for six people using the service. In most people's care plans we saw that the information documented was basic, minimal and did not contain specific information for each person.

The provider confirmed that safeguarding training was delivered mostly via e-learning training. Some staff had completed a DVD training package on safeguarding however the provider could not confirm how many staff had completed this training.

We looked at five staff files and saw that all five files had information missing or inaccurately recorded. We saw that all five staff files were missing one or both references for the relevant staff member before they started working for the service.

One staff member told us, 'The training could be improved. It would have been better if we had face to face training, not just online.'

We saw that people's care plan requirements and associated risk assessments were not always adequately identified to meet their individual needs. When people's care needs had been identified their care plans were not reviewed in line with the provider's own timescale.