Archived: Berwick-upon-Tweed

One person told us, "They are really good, they go over and above the call of duty.' We concluded people did not always experience care, treatment and support that met their needs and protected their rights because individual plans were not sufficiently detailed .

People were not protected against the risks associated with medicines because the systems for managing medicines were not always followed. Safe handling of medicines training had been completed, but there were inconsistencies in the frequency and depth of training provided.

People who used the service told us that generally they got support from a small group of staff. We saw that sometimes insufficient time was allowed for staff to travel between calls. We concluded as shifts were covered by the service there were enough staff to meet people's needs.

We concluded there were systems in place to monitor the quality of the service, but we found, in some instances, where issues were identified these were not addressed and used to inform the development of the service.

The service had a written complaints procedure that detailed the process to be followed in the event of a complaint. We found the procedure was not always followed appropriately and the registered manager was not consistently involved in investigations of complaints.

We found that arrangements for the supervision of staff were not fully in place.

People were treated with respect and were involved in making choices about their care.

The safeguarding procedures protected people who used the service.

Staff were well supported by the management team at Berwick and had appropriate opportunities to access training relevant to their roles.

There was no evidence of quality systems for assessing and monitoring the service.