4 August 2014
During a routine inspection
At the time of our inspection the service provided support to 17 people who received support with their personal care.
The inspector gathered evidence against the outcomes we inspected to help answer our five key questions; Is the service caring? Is the service responsive? Is the service safe? Is the service effective? Is the service well led? The inspector gathered information from people using the service and their relatives by telephoning them.
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?
People told us they felt safe. Staff understood how to protect people from harm. Over half of the staff team had not attended Safeguarding Vulnerable Adults training. The service had safeguarding procedures but they did not detail how to raise an alert to the local authority.
People told us that they felt their rights and dignity were respected.
The staff rotas took into account people's care needs and the health and well being of staff. We saw that people who required support using specialist equipment had two staff allocated to assist. This ensured that moving and handling procedures were carried out safely.
Recruitment policies and procedures were in place. However, a full employment history had not been sought. Employment checks such as references and risks identified following criminal records checks were not robust.
We have asked the provider to tell us how they will make improvements and meet the requirements of the law in relation to effective recruitment procedures and safeguarding vulnerable adults.
Is the service effective?
People's health and care needs were assessed with them. People were involved in writing their care plans. When specialist needs had been identified, staff had not always received training in these areas. We found that care plans were up to date and reflected people's current needs.
People told us that they could contact the registered manager when needed, however some people felt that they were not always listened to.
We have asked the provider to tell us how they will make improvements and meet the requirements of the law in relation to assessing and monitoring the quality of service provision.
Is the service caring?
We spoke with people who used the service. We asked them for their opinions about the staff that supported them. Feedback from people was positive, for example; 'Carers are good' and 'One lady who comes is an absolute gem, she has so much patience'.
When speaking with staff it was clear that they knew the people they supported well. Staff told us that they spent time with people getting to know them.
People using the service, their relatives, friends and other professionals involved with the service completed an annual satisfaction survey. Where shortfalls or concerns were raised these were not always taken on board and dealt with.
People's preferences, interests, aspirations and diverse needs had been recorded and care and support had been provided in accordance with people's wishes.
We have asked the provider to tell us how they will make improvements and meet the requirements of the law in relation to assessing and monitoring the quality of service provision.
Is the service responsive?
People knew how to make a complaint if they were unhappy. We saw that the service had responded to two complaints since our last inspection. People can be assured that complaints are investigated and action taken as necessary.
The service worked well with other agencies and services to make sure people were safe and protected from harm.
Is the service well-led?
The service has a quality assurance system in place. Senior staff carried out unannounced spot checks to make sure that staff were delivering care appropriately. Records showed that issues identified in these spot checks were raised with individual staff.
Staff told us they were clear about their roles and responsibilities. Staff had a good understanding of the ethos of the service.
Staff said that they did not feel well supported as they were not given time to travel in between calls. This made them late for most of their calls. We saw that the weekly rota did not always allocate travelling time between care visits.
We have asked the provider to tell us how they will make improvements and meet the requirements of the law in relation to assessing and monitoring the quality of service provision.