Archived: VJ Carers Limited

We found there were effective recruitment and selection processes in place. The provider had obtained missing documentation for the staff employed at the service. Recruitment procedures had been revised to ensure that, in future, appropriate checks would be undertaken before staff began working with people who use the service.

The provider had developed and implemented a programme of staff training and supervision. This meant people were cared for by staff who were supported to deliver care and support safely and to an appropriate standard.

We did not speak to the person using the service as part of this follow up review. The provider had visited the person using the service the week before our inspection. The purpose of that visit had been to check staff were doing what they should, to check required paperwork was up to date and to talk with the person using the service. From the record of that meeting we saw the person was satisfied with the service provided and had no concerns or issues they wanted addressed.

The provider and registered manager had taken some steps to improve their recruitment procedures. They had obtained some missing information and sought references for the support workers employed. However, they had not developed and implemented effective recruitment procedures to make sure those applying to work for the service were of good character and had the qualifications, skills and experience necessary for the work to be performed.

The service did not have suitable arrangements in place to ensure staff were appropriately supported, in relation to their responsibilities, to enable them to deliver care to people using the service safely and to an appropriate standard. Staff had not received appropriate training or supervision.

People who use the service were protected from the risk of abuse. This was because the provider had taken steps to ensure staff had received training in safeguarding of vulnerable adults and knew the action to take should there be any allegation or suspicion of abuse.

We spoke to a relative of a person using the service. They told us "the service is alright, I've no complaints". We found an assessment was carried out before people began to receive care. The care plan we looked at was based on the assessment and also contained relevant risk assessments.

The provider had safeguarding policies and procedures in place. However, the provider had not taken steps to evidence all staff had received safeguarding training.

Appropriate checks were not always carried out before staff began work. The three personnel files we looked at were all missing some of the documentation required by the regulations.

The provider was unable to evidence the training staff said they had received in previous employment. One member of staff had not received training in areas identified by the provider as mandatory. No formal supervision had been carried out at the time of our visit.

The provider had appropriate arrangements in place for assessing and monitoring the quality of the service, The provider had yet to undertake a formal survey of the people who use the service in order to obtain their views, but informal feedback had been sought.