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: 2 May 2012
Date of Publication: 10 May 2012
Inspection Report published 10 May 2012 PDF | 56.05 KB

People should be treated with respect, involved in discussions about their care and treatment and able to influence how the service is run (outcome 1)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Understand the care, treatment and support choices available to them.
  • Can express their views, so far as they are able to do so, and are involved in making decisions about their care, treatment and support.
  • Have their privacy, dignity and independence respected.
  • Have their views and experiences taken into account in the way the service is provided and delivered.

How this check was done

We reviewed all the information we hold about this provider, carried out a visit on 02/05/2012, looked at records of people who use services, talked to staff, reviewed information from stakeholders and talked to people who use services.

Our judgement

The provider was meeting this standard. People's privacy, dignity and independence were respected. People's views and experiences were taken into account in the way the service was provided and delivered in relation to their care.

User experience

People told us they were informed about what the service could provide and were provided with information about this. They told us they were asked what they wanted from the service. One person told us, “(The manager) came out and did an assessment we stated what we wanted.”

People told us that they were treated with respect and that staff maintained their privacy and dignity. One person commented, “They are very sensitive to us and X when they come into our home.” Staff were able to tell us how they ensured people’s privacy was maintained when they were assisting with personal care by ensuring people were covered and curtains were closed.

People told us the manager and staff responded to their requests for changes of times to their calls. One person said, “They are there when you need someone, very flexible.” Another person told us that new staff shadowed others so that they were able to build up a relationship with the person receiving a service. The manager then asked the person if they were satisfied with the conduct of the staff member and happy to have them involved in their service. It was only then that the staff member took part in delivering the care.

People told us and records confirmed that when new staff were being recruited to provide support for a specific person they were encouraged to take part in the interview. This ensured they could ask the questions important to them and ensure they were satisfied with the person appointed.

People told us that they were treated with respect and that staff maintained their privacy and dignity. One person commented ‘they are very sensitive to us and X when they come into our home.’ Staff were able to tell us how they ensured people’s privacy was maintained when they were assisting with personal care by ensuring people were covered and curtains were closed.

People told us the manager and staff responded to their requests for changes of times to their calls. One person said ‘they are there when you need someone, very flexible.’ Another person told us that new staff shadowed others so that they were able to build up a relationship with the person receiving a service. The manager then asked the person if they were satisfied with the conduct of the staff member and happy to have them involved in their service. It was only then that the staff member took part in delivering the care.

People told us and records confirmed that when new staff were being recruited to provide support for a specific person they were encouraged to take part in the interview. This ensured they could ask the questions important to them and ensure they were satisfied with the person appointed.

Other evidence

We found that there were systems in place to ensure that people received enough

information so that they were involved in the decision to use the service. An information leaflet and statement of purpose was available and records confirmed people had received these. This outlined the services that the agency offered and the terms and conditions of this.

We found that people expressed their views and were fully involved in planning their care. We saw care plans that had been read and amended by the people using the service to ensure their needs were met in the way they preferred. For example, one person had amended their care plan to change the frequency of when they were bathed as they wanted this more often.

We found that there were records of contact with the people using the service and their representatives by letter and e-mail about people’s care services. We found that any comments or suggestions were followed up. For example, after a letter from one of the people using the service had requested a change of carer. This had been agreed after some discussion.