Archived: True Colours Care

Is the service safe?

We spoke with two people who used the service or their relatives. We looked at people's records and plans of care. We spoke with staff and looked at how the service recruited new staff. People who used the service and their relatives told us they felt safe. Assessments for any risk associated with providing personal care were in place. Recruitment procedures were in place, but improvements to the records would have meant they were more rigorous and thorough.

Is the service effective?

People all had an individual care plan which set out their care needs. People we spoke with told us they were involved in planning their care and any review. We saw changes to care plans were made as people's needs changed.

Is the service caring?

A person who used the service told us: "I don't think they could get any better". Another said: "Brilliant".

Is the service responsive?

Regular newsletters were sent to people who used the service. People knew how to make a complaint but all the people we spoke with told us they had no concerns about the quality of the service they received. One person told us, "This is the best agency I have used".

Is the service well led?

The service had a quality monitoring system in place to ensure the quality of the service provided was monitored. The service canvassed the views of people who used the service and analysed the outcomes of the audits to ensure that any improvements to the service were put in place.

Staff were supported by the manager and had the appropriate training to fulfil their role effectively. They received regular meetings and spot checks of their practice to ensure the quality of care provided met people's needs.

The provider takes account of people's diverse needs and supports people to access services and other relevant professionals. This means that people benefit from a team who works together to support them.

People's needs are met by a staff team who have the right kind of skills and attributes. New staff receive support and training so that they are prepared for their job role and then staff receive on going training and support. People told us that staff are caring, compassionate and attentive to their needs. One person said, "The staff are very good and they are very kind and patient with me."

The provider had made some improvements in the safekeeping of records. However improvements are required in the way that records are maintained. Some care records did not contain all the required information and records relating to quality monitoring, handling complaints and staff supervision records had not been completed.

People were pleased with the care they received. People told us they were treated with respect and that their privacy and dignity was promoted. Comments included "The care workers make sure I am happy" and "The best care workers I know".

People told us that they felt safe. Care workers knew about the signs of abuse and confirmed that they would report any concerns they had.

People receiving a service were supported by care workers that received induction and some ongoing training. Care workers received some formal supervision of their work but there was no formal appraisal system in place. This meant that care workers' performance was not formally assessed and agreed plans for their future learning and development put in place.

People that received a service had the chance to regularly discuss their care and were confident that the manager would act on any concerns.

The agency was keeping care records up to date and accurate but plans of care were not kept safe and secure. Information relating to monitoring checks on the care people received and support provided to care workers was not always recorded.