• Services in your home
  • Homecare service

Archived: La vie en Rose

Old School House - Office, Deerhurst, Gloucester, Gloucestershire, GL19 4BX (01684) 439564

Provided and run by:
Mrs Katarzyna Malgorzata d'Orgee

All Inspections

26 June 2014

During an inspection looking at part of the service

An adult social care inspector carried out this inspection. On 17 April 2014 we found people who used the service were not protected against the risk of unsafe or inappropriate care and treatment arising from a lack of proper information about them. The provider had failed to maintain an accurate record in respect of each service user and other records relating to the management of the service. We also found the provider had not operated effective recruitment procedures. They had failed to determine whether staff were of a good character and had the qualifications, skills and experience necessary for the work to be performed. The provider wrote to us and told us how they would address this non-compliance and said this would be completed by 6 May 2014.

When carrying out inspections five key questions are asked: is the service safe, effective, caring, responsive and well led? As this inspection was following up non-compliance for breaches of two regulations, the question asked was is the service safe?

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary describes feedback from the registered manager and what the records told us. We did not speak with people using the service as part of this follow up inspection.

Is the service safe?

People were safe because the service followed safe recruitment practices. The service made sure they had appointed staff with the right skill mix, competencies, knowledge, qualifications and experience to meet people's individual needs at all times.

A safe service was provided because the provider made sure policies and procedures reflected the service received by people. They provided information people needed to know if they wished to contact professionals or others outside of the service. Staff had access to these amended policies and procedures to make sure they had up to date information.

Records relating to the care and wellbeing of people reflected their individual needs which ensured that staff had access to information about people's wishes and preferences about the way they were supported. This ensured their care was delivered safely.

17 April 2014

During a routine inspection

We considered all the evidence we had gathered under the outcomes we inspected. We used the information to answer the five questions we always ask;

Is the service safe?

Is the service effective?

Is the service caring?

Is the service responsive?

Is the service well led?

The inspection was completed by one inspector. We spoke with a person and their relative who received a service in their own home. We spoke with two members of staff. This is a summary of what we found.

Is the service safe?

Risk management plans identified most of the hazards and noted how to reduce and minimise these. We found staff were following these and used any equipment which had been provided to safeguard people from risk of falls. People were not put at unnecessary risk and were offered choices remaining in control of decisions about their care and support.

Safeguarding procedures were in place and staff had completed training in the safeguarding of adults. Staff understood how to make sure people were safe and protected from abuse. A relative said: "feel totally safe" and "I have no concerns about the care".

Staff personnel records did not contain all the information required by the Health and Social Care Act. This meant the provider could not demonstrate the staff employed to work for their service were suitable and had the skills and experience needed to support people. A compliance action has been set in relation to this and the provider must tell us how they plan to improve.

Is the service effective?

People told us they were happy with the care being provided. A relative told us: 'I couldn't have coped without them.' Staff had a good understanding of the needs of people with dementia. They responded to people calmly and sensitively.

Care records were based on the person's assessment of need. These reflected their wishes and preferences about how they wanted to be supported. A relative said: 'very happy with care' and 'staff are very good'.

Is the service caring?

We observed staff treating people respectfully and with kindness. People were offered choices about the way their care was delivered. Staff encouraged and supported people to complete tasks at their own pace.

A relative said: "the continuity is what I like and for (name provided) this is most important." We observed two of the three staff who supported this person carrying out tasks sensitively and with shared humour.

Is the service responsive?

A complaints system was in place and copies supplied to people at the start of their service. No complaints had been received. The registered manager had almost daily contact with people and discussed the quality of service provided with them. Where any issues were raised these were discussed with other agencies or services where appropriate.

The registered manager described their admissions process and how assessments were completed over two or three visits. Input from social and health care professionals was vital to this process. A service was then developed to ensure a timely and safe transition from other agencies back into their home.

Is the service well led?

As a new service the quality assurance system was still developing. The registered manager received feedback from people who used the service, their relatives and staff directly. This was used to monitor and evaluate the service being provided. Future plans included a survey enabling people to give formal feedback.

Staff worked alongside the registered manager who led by example. They were clear about their roles and responsibilities and delivering a service of a high quality.

We found inconsistencies with some records. Policies and procedures had not been dated or signed. Care plans and risk assessments did not provide an accurate personalised account of the care being delivered. This meant people could potentially not receive their care and support in the way which they preferred or which kept them safe from harm. Some other documents referred incorrectly to other organisations and needed to be updated. A compliance action has been set in relation to this and the provider must tell us how they plan to improve.