You are here

Archived: Home Instead Senior Care Also known as Silver Lining Care Services Limited t/a Home Instead Senior Care

This service is now registered at a different address - see new profile

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 14 January 2014
Date of Publication: 11 February 2014
Inspection Report published 11 February 2014 PDF

Staff should be properly trained and supervised, and have the chance to develop and improve their skills (outcome 14)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Are safe and their health and welfare needs are met by competent staff.

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 14 January 2014, observed how people were being cared for and checked how people were cared for at each stage of their treatment and care. We talked with people who use the service, talked with carers and / or family members, talked with staff and reviewed information given to us by the provider.

We spoke with the owners, the registered manager, two health care professionals, three relatives and a family friend.

Our judgement

People were cared for by staff who were well supported to deliver care and treatment safely and to an appropriate standard.

Reasons for our judgement

Staff received appropriate professional development. People told us that they were very satisfied with the care staff who visited them. Many people used the word ‘brilliant’ about the care staff. Comments included "some of the carers that come in are really brilliant”, “they (the care staff) do a brilliant job – very happy with the service” and "excellent so far". We spoke with staff about their induction and their ongoing training and support. Care staff told us they had good support, regular training and their competency was checked regularly. One member of staff told us "there's a lot of training - we are well trained".

We looked at the induction training for new staff and saw that it was a two-day course. This followed the recognised Skills for Care induction training and staff were trained on the Common Induction Standards. We were told that the induction training formed a 'second interview' to ensure that people with the right skills and experience had been appointed. We saw that further training was then undertaken within four weeks of appointment, for example medication training and safe handling and moving techniques.

New care staff were then required to 'shadow' a permanent member of staff - in the person's home whom they would be providing care or support for. One member of staff told us that they shadowed each person they went to before they went on their own. This period of time was dependant on the individual member of staff's needs and was flexible to meet their training needs. New staff then had a three month probationary period before their employment was confirmed. This meant that new staff were carefully monitored and supported.

The agency offered recognised City and Guilds dementia care training to all of the staff. This was introduced in recognition of the increasing amount of people who had a dementia related illness. Staff told us that, following the training, it had made them more confident and knowledgeable to look after people with a dementia need. One person told us “it helped with X – a lot of it is common sense but it helped to reaffirm this”. One health care professional told us that the agency was “good at dementia care” and that they used a “softly, softly approach to build up relationships”.

Staff told us that there was "always some training going on", “lots of training” and “we are well trained”. They told us that training needs were discussed in supervisions. Training involved internal and external training providers and was either undertaken in a classroom environment or with electronic processes such as DVD's. Staff told us that they never visited a person if they had not had the training or met the person first. People told us that all their staff were well trained and competent - and that they felt safe when they visited. This meant that people were cared for by care workers with the appropriate skills, knowledge or experience.

We saw that the agency recognised individual staff’s performance. One member of care staff had recently been recognised as ‘making a positive difference to a person’s life’. The member of care staff was very proud to have obtained this.