Archived: Winchester

50 Stockbridge Road, Winchester, Hampshire, SO22 6RL (01962) 842670

Provided and run by:
Greenbanks Homecare (Southern) Limited

Important: The provider of this service changed. See new profile

All Inspections

6, 12 December 2012

During an inspection looking at part of the service

When we visited in September 2012, we found the provider was not meeting five essential standards. We followed up on our concerns relating to staffing in November 2012 and found the service had achieved compliance in that area. We visited again in December 2012 to review progress in the other areas.

From this inspection, we found that the provider had made significant improvements to the way the service was planned, having recruited additional staff. One care worker said; 'The service is better planned, less reactive. (Care workers) say it's good to have the improved continuity (of care).' However, people's visits were still being omitted occasionally. The risks to people's care and welfare were reduced, but further work was required to improve communication to deliver a reliable service.

The service had reviewed people's care plans and had started to introduce more person-centred care plans.

The provider was monitoring the quality of care. Both people using the service and staff had been consulted and their views had been used to inform improvements. Complaints were responded to more promptly.

People's records were an accurate reflection of their needs. Care plans included risk assessments appropriate to the needs of people using the service. Care workers said the new care plans were better and care plans were updated. Staff had been trained to undertake risk assessments and procedures had been implemented to update care plans consistently.

2, 7 November 2012

During an inspection looking at part of the service

Overall, we found that appropriate steps had been taken to ensure there were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff to meet people's needs. This was because since our visit in September 2012, the service had reduced the number of care hours it was committed to deliver, on a temporary basis, and had recruited additional staff. Care packages had been transferred to other domiciliary care providers, in liaison with people using the service, Adult Social Services and other service providers, to ensure that people received safe care. Action had been taken to recruit additional care workers. The provider had also increased staff remunerations to attract new staff and to encourage staff retention. No additional care packages were being taken on until the staffing levels and other areas of non-compliance had been resolved.

17 September 2012

During a routine inspection

We carried out this inspection to follow up concerns that had been raised about this service and to review improvements the provider had made following the previous inspection on 29 February 2012. In February, we identified areas requiring improvement, and we received an action plan from the service in April 2012.

We inspected the Winchester branch on 13 September 2012. The manager was not available when we visited, but we were able to speak with the operations support manager who had been overseeing the management of the branch during the previous month.

To find out about people's experience of care, we telephoned six people who received a service from this agency. Five were willing to talk to us about their care. We also spoke with seven members of staff, both by telephone and in person.

All of the five people we spoke with told us that the care workers treated them in a respectful way and helped them to do as much as they could for themselves in a way they wanted to do it. One person, however, told us they had received care from a male care worker, when they had specifically requested a female. We also found that people were not always advised if their care worker was running late, or was going to arrive early.

Everyone said the care workers were good at looking after their care needs. One person said, 'I am so pleased with the service, they (the care workers) are so good.' Another person commented, 'The office staff are extremely helpful and friendly.' Two people related examples of when care workers had identified the need for medical assistance and had secured appropriate assistance. Relatives also said they were kept informed of any changes in people's health or needs. One person, who needed to receive care at specific times of the day, said they received a prompt and reliable service. They said the service understood that their care needs were 'time critical' and they felt their care was prioritised accordingly.

People also said, however, that the service had been less reliable recently. One person said, 'The service has been brilliant up to now.' This was usually worse at weekends, and had been a particular issue in recent months. They said this caused distress and anxiety as well as inconvenience. In addition, contact with the out of hours service (a telephone helpline operating outside office hours) was said to be worse at weekends. Most people said that staff were rushed. One person commented, 'In the holidays they seemed to run out of staff, and weekends were worse.'

We also found that records were incomplete and did not provide care workers with clear guidance on how to deliver care. These issues had not been identified promptly and addressed, since the provider's quality monitoring system was not effective.

29 February 2012

During an inspection in response to concerns

We telephoned people who used this service, to ask about their experiences of the care provided. People told us that they were treated with dignity and respect by staff who were caring and polite. People were generally complimentary about the skills of the care workers. They said that they were satisfied with the care given and their needs were attended to appropriately. Some people said that they hadn't, or couldn't recall, signing to agree their care package. However, they said that their care had been reviewed on a regular basis.