Archived: Generations and Companions Care Services

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary is based on our observations during the inspection, speaking with people using the service, the staff supporting them and from looking at records.

If you want to see the evidence supporting our summary please read our full report.

Is the service safe?

The service was safe.

We looked at the staff recruitment and selection. We saw four staff files and noted that appropriate recruitment processes had been undertaken. This included checks to ensure that staff were able to work with vulnerable adults.

Is the service effective?

The service was effective.

There were arrangements in place to ensure staff received and completed appropriate training. Staff were well supported by the registered manager. All staff were provided with regular supervision and an annual appraisal. They were also invited to attend staff meetings. This meant that staff had opportunities to discuss their work and the operation of the agency.

Relatives commented: 'The staff are remarkably good. They are very patient and cheery', 'Often the staff stay longer than they should' and 'The staff attitude is very good.'

Staff commented: 'We have a lot of information in the care plans about the individual', 'We have staff meetings', 'The training is pretty good' and 'I love my job. Getting out and about and helping people.' Staff said the manager was supportive. Staff also said 'She treats the people who use the service really well' and 'She keeps it all running smoothly.' Staff spoken with confirmed that they didn't have any concerns about the welfare of people they supported.

Is the service caring?

The service was caring.

The people we spoke with were happy with the care and support they received. People confirmed they were encouraged to express their views of the service and were involved in decisions about their care and support.

We spoke with four people who used the service, two relatives, four staff members and the registered manager. People who used the service said: 'Staff help me choose which clothes I am going to wear, and offer me a choice of meals from the meals available in my freezer', 'The staff are very nice', 'The staff are very pleasant and their visits buck me up' and 'The staff are wonderful.' All the people we spoke with confirmed they were well cared for and their dignity and privacy were respected.

Is the service responsive?

The service was responsive.

We looked at care plans and other care records for 12 people who used Generations and Companions Care Agency and they all had an assessment of the person's health and social needs completed. The care plans gave a good overview of people's needs and were up to date.

We saw the complaints policy and procedure and noted that no complaints had been made since the last inspection. People who we spoke with said they had no complaints or concerns regarding the service.

Is the service well led?

At the previous inspection compliance actions were made which had been addressed by the provider.

There was a registered manager in post.

People said they would recommend the service to others, saying that 'it's a very good service', 'Staff are very kind and chatty', 'Staff carry out tasks well' and 'I am listened to.'

" They are here every day and never miss a visit"

"The care is wonderful"

"They are good at what they do"

"I feel safe with them"

"I do not have a complaint but I know what to do if I did"

" They have sent me a questionnaire about what I think of the staff"

"I am very happy with them and they are helpful and friendly"

"My relative has settled in to the service and they are getting used to the staff"

We found that systems were in place for people using the service and their families to raise any complaints and the information was available to them in order to do this if needed. We found that systems were in place to ensure that people using the service were protected from harm.

We found that the service had not made adequate checks during the recruitment of staff and as a result people who used the service were not fully protected by the recruitment process.

We found that risk assessments only included risks faced by individuals in their health and social needs and that no assessments had been completed in relation to the home environment in which they were being supported.

We found that quality assurance systems were in place but were inconsistently applied with no action taken where deficiencies in quality had been identified.