You are here

Archived: PSA Home Care

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

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

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 6 February 2014
Date of Publication: 8 March 2014
Inspection Report published 08 March 2014 PDF | 85.33 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 looked at the personal care or treatment records of people who use the service, carried out a visit on 6 February 2014, 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.

Our judgement

People’s privacy, dignity and independence were respected.

Reasons for our judgement

People who used the service understood the care and treatment choices available to them.

People told us that when they first contacted the agency, the agency manager visited them to assess their or their relative’s needs. This was so that a joint decision could be made about how people’s needs could be met. People told us that they and family members had been involved in developing a plan of care and that it reflected their needs. One person told us that the agency manager had been valuable in ensuring that their relative had the right equipment in place, before care support started. We saw that care plans had been signed by the person concerned or their representative which evidenced that they had been involved in and agreed with their content. This meant that people were involved in their care and treatment plans.

Staff demonstrated that they understood how to respect people’s dignity and privacy when providing people with support. They said that they had got to know the people whom they supported over a period of time and had developed a relationship with them. Staff explained how they communicated with people in an individual manner. For example, one member of staff said that when they communicated with a person who had dementia, they explained things in different ways and checked to ensure that they had understood what they were saying. People told us that they or their relative were always treated with respect. One person told us that staff addressed a person by their preferred name and another person said, “They treat me as a friend”. This meant that people’s privacy and dignity was respected when personal care and support was provided.

Plans of care contained detailed information about people’s choices and preferences to guide staff. This related to what people liked to eat and how they wanted to be supported with their personal care needs. For example, one plan stated that a person liked the crusts to be cut off their toast. Daily notes recorded by staff evidenced that staff respected people’s wishes. For example, one entry stated that a person was tired and therefore did not want to be supported with a shower when staff visited to support them. This meant that guidance was in place about people’s preferences and that staff followed it to ensure that people’s choices were respected.

People said that their independence was promoted by how staff supported them. One person explained how their mobility had improved through the support of staff. This meant that people were supported to maintain and promote their independence.