Archived: Tailored Care Ltd.

Tailored Care Limited is a care service registered to provide personal care and support for people in their own homes. At the time of our inspection they were providing care and support for approximately 30 people.

There is a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People were protected from the risk of harm and abuse because they were supported by staff who knew how to recognise and respond to abuse. Staff were not employed until required checks had been made about them to ensure they were suitable to support people in their homes.

People were supported to arrange their care with the staff and were involved in their reviews. The registered manager encouraged people to raise any issues. People were confident that action would be taken by the management team to resolve any problems.

People were encouraged to be as independent as possible and take charge of their care. Staff provided care which was kind, compassionate and promoted people’s privacy and dignity. Staff had developed good relationships with the people they supported. People were supported to make their own choices and decisions and felt listened to and respected.

Staff received induction and comprehensive training in order to equip them with the skills to do their job. Staff were well supported by the management team and received regular feedback on their performance through structured supervision.

People knew how to make a complaint if they needed to. The provider completed regular quality checks to ensure standards of care were maintained. People had the option to comment about the quality of their service on a regular basis. Any areas for improvement that were identified were acted upon. People were aware of who the management team were and felt they were approachable and listened to them. They considered this aspect of the service had recently improved.

This is a summary of what we found-

Is the service safe?

The people we spoke with considered they were kept safe when the staff were in their property. They felt that staff listened to their preferences. One person told us, 'I feel that I have been listened to because they asked about my preference for a male or female care worker and said it was my right to choose'.

We saw records that informed us that a person living with mental health needs was cared for effectively by staff who responded to their dignity and protected them from harm. The staff had worked with external healthcare professionals to improve the safety and quality of life for the individual.

Staff understood about the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). This meant they knew how to safeguard people's best interests and how this would be put into practice in the service.

Recruitment practice was thorough and safe for new starters. The checks required by legislation had been carried out before the applicants cared for people in their own homes. This meant that suitable staff were employed to care for people who used the service.

Is the service caring?

The people we spoke with told us they felt that their dignity was respected and they were assisted to remain in their home as they wished. They told us that staff treated them kindly and that their individual needs were met. We saw in records that people's care was regularly reviewed with them and that they were encouraged to be as independent as they wanted to be. The registered manager identified appropriate staff to care for individuals. There was an emphasis on respectful behaviour and positive attitudes towards people who used the service. People told us that they were encouraged to make their views of the care known to staff and management. This showed that staff listened to people and cared about them and if they were unhappy with anything. Staff told us they tried to look after people in the way they wanted. This meant that caring and positive relationships were developed.

Is the service responsive?

The people's views were sought through regular client satisfaction visits and an annual survey. This meant that people could express their views anonymously if they wished. We were told that the registered manager was regularly in contact with people so any issues were discussed on an informal basis as and when they occurred and action immediately taken. The registered manager was able to tell us how people's ability to make decisions would be considered. Contact with other health professionals was positive so people received the external professional support they needed. This meant people were supported to express their views and staff were responsive to their needs to enhance their well-being.

The people we spoke with understood how they could make a complaint. Concerns and complaints were recorded in the office. This ensured that people's concerns would be responded to.

Is the service effective?

People's on going needs were regularly re assessed and their care was planned with them. The registered manager had received information from the funding authority where it had not been possible to visit the person before starting their service. Records for assessments of need and risk were in place. People told us they had been satisfied with how they were dealt with by the service. They said they had been asked about their preferences, choice and wishes before they received care. Staff we spoke with showed that they knew people's needs well. Staff told us they were confident of their ability to carry out their role as required. This meant people were supported to maintain optimum health and well-being and that the planned care was effective.

The service had provided staff with training to be able to care for a person with a life limiting disease and also support their family. People's choice for end of life care was respected by staff and as needs changed staff knew how to manage their care appropriately.

Is the service well led?

We were shown the systems in place to monitor and assure the quality of care provision. Any shortfalls in audits were referred to the registered manager but records did not always summarise what action, if any, had been taken to improve these areas. Although a verbal account was given by the management of how any points had been addressed. This meant the service had implemented an inward looking practice but recognised the need to improve their recording of the outcomes of their management systems to lead the service better.

Staff were effectively deployed across the geographical area of the service to make sure people received the care they needed when they needed it and for as long as the visit required. One person told us, 'I have no worries that they will turn up and I look forward to their visit'.

There was a registered manager in post at the service. This person also covered another location in Telford. We could see from our inspection of both locations that there was a consistency of resources and support available to the registered manger. There was a culture of learning and development to drive improvement within the service. This meant that the provider demonstrated good management and leadership.