Archived: Stonham Bradford

' Is the service safe?

' Is the service effective?

' Is the service caring?

' Is the service responsive?

' Is the service well led?

This is a summary of what we found. The summary describes the records we looked at and what people using the service and the staff told us.

Is the service safe?

There were five people using the service at the time of our visit. We spoke with two people who used the service and one relative. They all told us they felt safe when staff visited them.

Each person's care file had risk assessments which covered areas of potential risk. When people were identified as being at risk, their support plans showed the actions required to manage these risks.

We found the service had made appropriate improvements to ensure the documentation it kept was fit for purpose and protected people against the risk of inappropriate care or treatment

We found there were effective systems in place to reduce the risk and spread of infection.

There were enough skilled and experienced staff to ensure people received a consistent and safe level of support.

Is the service effective?

People had an individual support plan which set out their care needs. We found people and/or their representatives were involved in the assessment and planning of their health and care needs. This meant people could be assured their individual care needs and wishes were identified and planned for.

We saw health action plans were in place for most people who used the service and these were reviewed annually. People had access to a range of health professionals and the input of other healthcare professionals involved in people's care and treatment was clearly recorded within care records.

Is the service caring?

Our discussions with people and the records we looked at told us that individual wishes for care and support were taken into account and respected. People said they were provided with a high standard of care. One person told us 'Since I have been poorly staff have been wonderful; they have got me back on my feet again'. One person said 'It is a top notch service; staff look after my relative really well and do a great job to make sure everything is absolutely perfect for them'.

We found the care staff we spoke with demonstrated a good knowledge of people's needs and were able to explain how individuals preferred their care and support to be delivered.

Is the service responsive?

Care records were reviewed and any changes made either when people's needs changed or as part of the six monthly review process. We saw evidence of this within the care records we reviewed. We also saw people and their representatives attended care reviews and were given the opportunity to raise any concerns and suggest changes to how their care and support was provided. The staff we spoke with told us they would immediately commence a care review if they noticed a change in people's needs.

Is the service well-led?

We saw there was a quality assurance monitoring system in place that was designed to continually monitor and identify shortfalls in the service and any non-compliance with the essential standards of quality and safety.

Overall, people's personal care records and other records, such as staff files, were accurate and complete.

People who used the service told us if there were any problems they felt able to raise these with staff and were confident they would be listened to.

We found there were systems in place for the management of medicines and a complaints procedure was available should people wish to raise concerns about the service. There were also relevant recruitment procedures to ensure appropriate checks were undertaken before staff began work.

However, despite the positive comments people made we found care records were not organised and completed in a way that protected people from the risk of unsafe or inappropriate care and treatment.

Our observations of the service showed that care staff spoke with and interacted with people who used the service in a patient and pleasant manner. Care staff supported people in a sensitive way using differing methods of communication to ensure that people understood what was going to happen.

There were systems and processes, policies and procedures in place to support care delivery. Report writing in the care records was up to date and reflected the changes in care and treatment that people received. Although we did note that the documentation lacked consistency in terms of daily recording. We also found that staff were supported and monitored in their working practice. Training and appraisal programmes were in place.

We observed a visit to one person who used the service. We saw them being listened to and the views of that person and their relative being taken into account. We saw that people who used the service were encouraged to make choices about the activities they engaged in. Staff spoke with and interacted with the people who used the service in a patient and pleasant manner.