You are here

Archived: Omnia Support (Birmingham)

This service was previously registered at a different address - see old profile

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 29 July 2013
Date of Publication: 16 August 2013
Inspection Report published 16 August 2013 PDF | 76.15 KB

The service should have quality checking systems to manage risks and assure the health, welfare and safety of people who receive care (outcome 16)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Benefit from safe quality care, treatment and support, due to effective decision making and the management of risks to their health, welfare and safety.

How this check was done

We looked at the personal care or treatment records of people who use the service, carried out a visit on 29 July 2013, checked how people were cared for at each stage of their treatment and care and talked with people who use the service. We talked with carers and / or family members, talked with staff and reviewed information sent to us by commissioners of services.

Our judgement

The provider had an effective system to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people receive.

Reasons for our judgement

People who used the service, their representatives and staff were asked for their views about their care and treatment and they were acted on. One person told us: "The manager always asks if we are happy with the service being provided" and another told us that "I have found that if I suggest anything, they will listen to me." We viewed ‘satisfaction surveys’ for people using the service and their representatives. We saw that people were positive about the service they were receiving. None of the people we spoke with had any complaints or concerns. However, people were confident that if they had any complaints they would be addressed.

Staff we spoke with told us that they were given opportunities to give their views and be listened to. The manager told us of some of the changes that had taken place due to staff suggestions. We saw and staff confirmed that they had made suggestions that had been acted upon. This showed that the provider took account of complaints and comments to improve the service. This meant people could be assured of a service that was continually improving.

Staff meetings took place but we were told that more frequently there were informal discussions between staff and management to talk about any issues or any changing requirements of the people they supported. This meant that decisions about care and treatment reflected the current needs of people using the service.