Archived: appa me limited

There were two people receiving the regulated activity of personal care at the time of our visit. We spoke with one person who used the service. We were unable to contact the other person who used the service. We spoke with the provider and two members of staff. We reviewed care records for people who used the service and records relating to the management of the service, which included three staff files.

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

Is the service safe?

The staff employed were suitably trained and experienced. All staff had attended training in the past year, which included safeguarding vulnerable adults, control of substances hazardous to health and moving and handling.

There were up to date care plans in place for each person and there was evidence potential or actual risks had been assessed and plans put in place to manage such risks. Care plans included details of health professionals involved in the delivery of each person's care.

Is the service effective?

People who used the service were involved in decisions about their care and support. Staff supported people and advised them, but allowed the person who used the service to make the final decision. A member of staff told us, "I ask what they would like."

Is the service caring?

The people we spoke with told us the staff were supporting them well. Staff told us how they cared for the people who used the service, working to meet the needs of people as individuals. People who used the service told us, "They are good to me."

Is the service responsive?

People's individual needs had been assessed by suitably experienced staff. The staff we spoke with were fully aware of the needs of people who used the service and how to meet their care needs. The people we spoke with told us they were aware of how to make a complaint. We case tracked one complaint which had been made in the past year and found this had been investigated and brought to satisfactory resolution.

Is the service well-led?

Staff told us they were able to raise concerns and felt able to speak to care managers over the phone. One person who used the service had provided feedback in the past year and it was very positive.

At our inspection on 23 January 2014 we found the provider had made improvements in the areas we inspected. Staff we spoke with had an understanding of safeguarding vulnerable adults' procedures as the provider had given all staff a copy of the policy and provided safeguarding vulnerable adults training. We found the provider had recruited some new members of staff and had done so in a way that was appropriate and in accordance with their recruitment policy. In addition the staff induction had been improved, staff received appropriate training and staff were adequately supported through supervision and appraisal.

We found people were involved in their care, their independence was promoted and their privacy and dignity was maintained. People had assessments to establish their care needs, and their care was adequately planned and appropriately delivered. The provider had policies and procedures for safeguarding vulnerable adults, however staff received inadequate training. Staff had not always been appropriately recruited to ensure people were safe, and staff were not always appropriately supported through induction or adequate training. The provider had some systems in place to ensure that people were happy and received a good quality service.