We spoke with the manager, quality manager, service manager, a member of staff, and two relatives of people who used the service as part of the inspection process. We had previously received information from the service's commissioners.
We found that people's care and welfare needs were being met.
The service had quality monitoring systems in place which supported the service to maintain the quality of care being delivered.
We also had concerns that staff were not supported to fulfil their role. Staff had not received any training since being employed at Exchange House or regular support and supervision. Since our inspection Exchange House has implemented an appraisal policy and staff have received training.
We found that people that used the service were involved as much as they were able in the planning and delivery of the service.
Relatives of people who used the service told us they were generally happy with staff and the service their relative had received.
We looked to see how the service safeguarded people from abuse or the risk of abuse. We had concerns as the service did not have procedures in place to follow in the event of abuse being suspected.
We spoke with staff and they told us they felt supported by the service. We could not see and staff told us that they had received no training or appraisals since being employed at Exchange House.
The service had implemented quality audit systems which they had completed and identified areas that needed improvement. We spoke with commissioners of the service who told us they were working with Exchange House to improve services.
We found the service was compliant in three of the five outcomes we looked at.