You are here

Archived: Granby at Home Good


Inspection carried out on 1 February 2016

During a routine inspection

The inspection was carried out on 1 and 2 February 2016. This inspection was announced as we gave the provider 48 hours’ notice of the inspection in order to ensure people we needed to speak with were available.

At our last inspection on 26 November 2013 the provider was meeting the regulations that were assessed.

Granby at Home provides care and support to people who live in their own homes in the Harrogate area and in the assisted living service Granby Gardens. The agency’s office is situated in Granby Gardens. The service is registered to provide the regulated activity personal care. The agency is part of the Brighterkind group.

There was a registered manager at the service. 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.’

The feedback we received from people who used the service was very positive. We received no negative comments. People told us they had confidence in the staff and they felt safe in the way staff supported them.

Any risks to people had been assessed and plans put in place to reduce those risks whilst maintaining people’s independence. Risks were assessed in relation to staff safely carrying out their roles. All risk assessments were reviewed regularly to make sure they continued to be appropriate. Any accidents and incidents were reported and there were systems in place to support staff should an emergency occur.

Appropriate checks were made as part of the service’s recruitment process. These checks were undertaken to make sure staff were suitable to work with people who used the service. The service provided a training programme for staff to ensure they had the knowledge and skills to support people. This included a comprehensive induction and training at the beginning of their employment, and all mandatory health and safety training.

We saw systems were in place to provide staff support. Staff participated in staff meetings, and one to one supervision meetings with their supervisor and completed an annual appraisal. The agency had a whistleblowing policy, which was available to staff. Staff told us they would feel confident using it and that the appropriate action would be taken.

Policies and procedures were in place covering the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA), which aims to protect people who may not have the capacity to make decisions for themselves. The Mental Capacity Act 2005 sets out what must be done to make sure that the human rights of people who may lack mental capacity to make decisions are protected, including balancing autonomy and protection in relation to consent or refusal of care or treatment. Staff had received training in this subject.

Where people needed assistance taking their medicine this was administered by staff that had been trained to carry out this role. Staff liaised with healthcare professionals at the appropriate time to help monitor and maintain people’s health and wellbeing.

People told us they were included in discussions about how their support was provided. They told us they were introduced to staff prior to them providing support and described staff from the agency as kind and considerate. People told us that they were treated with dignity and respect.

People’s care plans were detailed and reflected individual choice. The registered manager reviewed people’s care packages with them regularly to ensure people’s care needs were met and this was recorded, up to date and accurate. Staff told us they felt well informed about people’s needs and how to meet them.

People said they were confident in raising concerns. Each person was given a copy of the agency’s complaints procedures.

The provider had systems in place to enable people to share their opin

Inspection carried out on 26 November 2013

During a routine inspection

We spoke with eight people who used the service on the day of the visit to the agency. Everyone told us that they were very satisfied with the care and support they received. People told us that staff were very �conscientious� and �I am delighted; staff are very presentable; I have no complaints what so ever.� Everyone said that staff arrived on time and if they did happen to be delayed they received a courtesy telephone call to let them know the carer would be with them as soon as possible.

We looked at four people�s care records and saw that people had been included in decisions about how their care was provided and their preferences and wishes respected. One person we spoke with said �Care is provided how I like it; they do everything I want.�

There were safe systems in place for supporting people with their medication. The agency had a medication policy and staff received training which included a practical test to demonstrate competency.

Staff were supported in their jobs and received training which helped develop their skills and knowledge. Staff met regularly and they told us there was good team work and support from the manager.

The agency had systems in place to make sure people were safely cared for. This included policies and procedures, training for staff and quality monitoring systems.

Inspection carried out on 5 October 2012

During a routine inspection

We spoke with four people by telephone who received personal care from the agency.

Everyone who used the service said staff from the agency had visited them prior to arranging the care package. They also said they had received all the information they needed about the organisation before they made a decision to use them. People also told us that they were treated with respect by their care staff and that their dignity was respected. Comments made to us by people who use the service and their relatives included �They are smashing; there is nothing bad about the service. New staff are always introduced to me and if they are going to be delayed someone rings me to let me know.� One person told us �I always feel better after they have been, I am very satisfied. The manager came to see me and we talked about what I wanted.� Another said �They are always kind and jolly, I talked to the manager about what I wanted and that�s what the staff do for me.� Another person said �I have no complaints and if I did I feel I could talk to the manager about it and she would listen.�

This meant that people were involved in planning and making decisions about the care they wanted and meant that the agency was responsive to individual needs.

We spoke with three members of staff by telephone about their job roles. They told us that the support they received from the manager and senior staff was good, especially �on call� arrangements during the evenings and weekends.

Inspection carried out on 22 September 2011

During a routine inspection

Staff from the agency were described by people using the service as �champion� and said they �can�t fault them�. People told us the staff generally arrive and leave on time, unless they are delayed by the �traffic�. They said the service can be flexible and provided examples of when the manager had changed the times of the service.

People said they were involved in the planning of their care and the staff were both �respectful� and �very helpful�. They provided us examples of how they could change the day and time of the service if needed.

People were confident that any concerns or complaints they may have would be dealt with appropriately by the agency. They told us their views about the service were sought in surveys and they are asked by the manager if they are satisfied with the service provided.

However we were able to identify improvements were needed to the written records and quality monitoring systems to ensure the service provision remained to a high standard.