Archangel Home Care

People’s experience of using this service: Staff raised concerns in the deployment and levels of staff. Risk were assessed, but not always recorded. There was a risk staff were not trained to follow infection control guidelines effectively. Processes were in place to manage accidents and incidents, but outcomes were not always recorded. People were kept safe from harm. Medicine systems were organised, and people received their medicine as prescribed.

Staff supervision and support was not taking place on a regular basis. People’s needs were assessed. Staff were knowledgeable about the people they cared for. People’s nutritional needs were met. The service supported people to work with other professionals and agencies to ensure they received effective care. People were involved in decisions about the environment they lived. People were supported to live a healthy life style. The service was working within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

Staff were kind and companionate towards the people they cared for. People were supported to express their views about their care and support. People were treated with respect at all times.

Care was personalised to each individual and people were empowered to make choices and have control of their life. People were aware how to make a complaint and raise a concern, however these were not always recorded to identify the outcome for people. End of life policies and procedures were in place should people wish to discuss their end of life care needs.

People complimented the service and their experience was good. Planning and development was not always monitored or recorded in line with the providers policy and procedures. There was a registered manager in place, but staff felt they were not always approachable or organised to support them. People were involved in their care and support and had the opportunity to give feedback about the service. The registered manager was passionate about the care the service provided and put processes in place to learn and improve the service. People were supported to access other professionals and work with other agencies as required.

Rating at last inspection: Good date last report published 26 March 2016

Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the rating at the last inspection. We saw the service had deteriorated since the last inspection. This meant the service required improvement.

Follow up: We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received we may inspect sooner.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

The service had a registered manager in place at the time of our inspection. 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.

People were supported by staff who understood the risks people could face and knew how to make them feel safe. People were encouraged to act safely and to do what they were able to as independently as possible.

People were supported by staff that they knew. People received a flexible service that suited their individual circumstances. People were prompted to take their medicines if needed.

People were supported by staff who were trained and given guidance on how to do meet their needs. People’s human rights to make decisions for themselves may be overlooked as the legislation to ensure people’s rights were upheld was not being followed.

People were supported to eat a healthy and balanced diet which promoted their wellbeing. People received support from staff who understood their physical and mental health needs.

People were treated with respect by staff who demonstrated compassion and understanding. People were encouraged to set goals to maximise their strengths and build on their independence.

People were involved in planning and reviewing the support they received. People were encouraged to express any issues of concerns they had so these could be looked into.

People who used the service and staff were able to express their views about the service which were acted upon. The registered manager provided leadership that gained the respect of staff and motivated them as a team. There were systems in place to monitor the quality of the service and make improvements when needed.