You are here

Archived: Allied Healthcare Southampton

Reports


Inspection carried out on 15 September 2014

During an inspection to make sure that the improvements required had been made

We carried out an inspection to review the complaints management and record keeping. We had set compliance actions following our last inspection in April 2014. We considered all the evidence we had gathered under these outcomes, we inspected. We looked at the process the provider had in place for complaints and record management. We spoke with three people, five staff and the manager. We used the information to answer the questions we always ask;

Is the service responsive?

Is the service well-led?

This is a summary of what we found;

Is the service responsive?

The service was responsive to people's needs and took appropriate actions. People were aware of the complaints procedure and who to contact to raise their concerns. Staff said they would always report any concerns or complaints to the manager. They were confident appropriate actions would be taken as required to safeguard people. Complaints were responded to appropriately and records of these were maintained.

Is the service well-led?

The provider had developed and reviewed the complaints management process since the last inspection. A record of complaints was in place which included a complaints log and responses sent following complaints investigations. The records of care were mostly maintained securely. Personalised records of care and treatment were reviewed and available when we requested them. Some records were not secure and the manager had assured us immediate action would be taken to ensure these were maintained securely.

Inspection carried out on 10 April 2014

During a routine inspection

We considered all the evidence we had gathered under the outcomes we inspected. We followed up on compliance actions which were set in July 2013 for care and welfare of service users, medication, assessing and monitoring the quality of service provisions. 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

This is a summary of what we found.

Is the service safe?

Assessments were completed prior to people receiving care. Risks were considered and staff had received training in the safe moving and handling of people. As part of their initial assessment, risk pertaining to people�s homes was considered and an action plan developed to safeguard people and the staff. We found the service had systems in place to ensure people were protected from the risk of abuse. Staff had completed training in safeguarding vulnerable adults as part of their induction. There was system in place in supporting the staff in raising any concerns. Staff were confident in reporting any allegation of abuse which included going to external agencies.

Is the service effective?

People told us they were satisfied with the care and support they were receiving. Three people told us the staff came �mostly� at the expected time for the visits. Another person said the staff were �really good �and they looked forward to their visits. A relative told us their relative they had recently started using the service and �all was fairly good�. We found assessments had been completed prior to starting the care package. Care plans had been developed to reflect their assessed needs. We saw care plans included risk assessments. These were relevant to the person and specified action required to manage risks.

Is the service caring?

People told us the care staff were �very kind� and they were provided support in a caring manner. Two relatives said their family members �get on very well with the staff�. A relative said �my dad likes (staff member) best and �they get on very well�. Another relative said they had requested a male care staff member and this was provided. Staff we spoke with were aware of people�s particular needs and how they liked their care delivered. Another person commented �my carer does a very good job and has a great sense of humour�.

Is the service responsive?

People told us they been involved in their own or their relative's assessments and care planning. This meant their views and preferences were taken into account when providing care. Staff told us they reported changes in people�s needs to the office; and senior staff carried out regular reviews of people. The majority of people told us the staff in the office were not responsive when they called with any queries or concerns. A person told us �they tell you they will get back to you, but they never do�. People said they were not kept informed of staff changes when their regular care staff member was off sick or �running late�. A comment was �the communication skills to and from the office could be improved�. People said they did not feel confident in raising their concerns as they felt the office staff were unresponsive.

We found the process for dealing appropriately with complaints and comments was not effective. We have asked the provider to tell us what they are going to do to meet the requirements of the law in relation to the management of people�s concerns and complaints.

Is the service well-led?

Staff told us they were felt supported and could contact the office or out of hours service for advice. The supervisors carried out spot checks and monitored their practices.

Systems were in place to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service provided. Risks were assessed including the environment and appropriate action plans were in place. There is no registered manager at the service and the provider had told us this was being addressed.

Records were stored securely; however we found some records were not available when we requested to see them. The records for food and fluids were not accurately completed which may impact on the care people receive.

We found that records were not maintained accurately and were not always available when they were needed. We have asked the provider to tell us what they are going to do to meet the requirements of the law in relation to record keeping.

Inspection carried out on 28 June and 2 July 2013

During a routine inspection

To help us to understand people's experiences of the service we telephoned people using the service to get their views, as this was a domiciliary care service. We spoke with twelve people using the service and nine staff. People told us they received care from staff who �very good� and were very happy with the care. Another person told us �I usually have the same staff". Another person commented �can�t give them enough credit�. All people said the staff courteous and respectful. Another person said the staff were "very good and no complaints". Six people told us they had regular care staff and they arrived at the planned times more or less. People said they did not always receive the rosters and this �had been a problem�.

People were assessed prior to receiving care and care plans developed. The care plans were being developed as they lacked information about people's current needs. Reviews of care plans had not been carried out which meant care and support may not be provided appropriately and according to people's current needs.

There was a recruitment process and checks were completed. Staff were supported to complete an induction and a supervision process was followed. The provider did not have an effective system to regularly assess and monitor the quality of the service. There was a mixed response about how to raise concerns, as three people were unsure about who to contact.

Inspection carried out on 27 June 2012

During a routine inspection

To help us to understand people�s experiences of the service we telephoned them as this is a domiciliary care agency. We spoke to five people who use services, their family and six staff who were providing care to them.

People were complimentary about their care and said that the staff had carried out an assessment of their needs. This was to ensure that their needs could be met before agreeing to provide a service. They told us they had been involved in planning their care and that the staff had discussed things such as the time that care staff would be coming to them.

Three people commented that their privacy and dignity were �always respected when receiving care. Other comments were �the staff are very good.�

One person told us that they had the same care staff and this was a good thing as they received continuity in their care. Two people said that they were aware of the times of their visits and the staff usually kept to those times. One person said that �they ring and let you know if they are going to be late.�

Inspection carried out on 8 February 2012

During a routine inspection

We spoke with people who use the service and relatives. Everyone we spoke with was positive about the service.

We were told by a person who uses the service that there was good communication from the agency staff and that staff met their needs. They were pleased with the service provided by the agency.

A relative told us care staff were, �excellent� and went out of their way to support people. Where two staff were needed at the same time, they would generally arrive within five minutes of each other. We were told that staff supported the person in the way they liked and that their privacy and dignity was respected.

People also told us they would feel able to complain.