Archived: Southside Business Centre

If you want to see the evidence that supports our summary please read the full report.

Is the service safe?

A person who used the service said, "I feel safe in the presence of staff, they follow my care plan and are trained to do what they have to do.'

People and their relatives acting on their behalf told us staff respected their rights and dignity. Suitable arrangements were in place for obtaining people's consent and acting in accordance with their wishes in relation to their care and support.

Risk assessments had been undertaken to identify any potential risks and the actions required to manage the risk. This meant that people were not put at unnecessary risk but also had access to choice and remained in control of decisions about their care and lives.

Records showed that staff were aware of potential environmental risks. They told us documentation reflecting changing risks were always updated and communicated to all staff.

Staff recruitment practice was safe and thorough. Policies and procedures were in place to make sure that unsafe practice was identified and action taken to ensure the safety of people.

A medication policy and procedure was in place and had been subject to recent review. New medication guidelines had also been produced for staff. Staff training records showed that those involved in medicine practices had received relevant training which included a practice assessment. Senior staff carried out 'spot checks' on staff in relation to medication practice and monitored their practice. These arrangements protected people against risks of unsafe medicine practice by ensuring staff followed procedures and continued to have the required competencies and skills.

Systems were in place for managers and staff to learn from adverse events such as accidents, incidents, medicine errors, complaints and concerns. This reduced risks to people and helped the service to continually improve.

Is the service effective?

People and their relatives told us that their health and care needs had been assessed with them. They said their support plans were up to date, reflecting their current needs.

Staff had received training to ensure they had the necessary skills to meet people's needs.

Managers' were accessible to staff for advice and support.

Is the service caring?

We asked people and their relatives for their opinions about the support provided. Comments were very positive, for example,

'I feel staff are excellent, kind and polite. They will go that extra mile.' 'Staff are always on time, they are very caring and have a good attitude.' Relatives told us that people's preferences, interests, aspirations and diverse needs had been recorded and staff provided support in accordance with their wishes.

Care workers we consulted demonstrated a good understanding of people's needs. They were able to give examples of how they promoted their independence.

Is the service responsive?

People and their relatives told us they had not had reason to make a complaint about the service but knew how to make a complaint if they were unhappy. We found appropriate procedures were in place to respond to and record any complaints received. People could be assured that systems were in place to investigate complaints and take action as necessary.

People and relatives said they felt managers listened to them and responded to their views. They told us staff and managers were flexible, accommodating requests for changes to visit times.

Is the service well-led?

The service had an effective quality assurance system in place. Records showed that identified problems and opportunities to change things for the better were being addressed. Examples included improvements in staffs' record keeping skills. As a result the quality of the service was continuously improving.

Staff told us they were clear about their roles and responsibilities. They said they received good support and guidance from managers. They demonstrated a good understanding of the agency's ethos and commitment towards their work. This helped ensure people received a good quality service.

Staff are properly trained, supervised and appraised and have opportunities to gain further skills and qualifications. They are given sufficient time to meet people's assessed needs and carry out their plans of care. Managers are accessible and visible and the service is well led. Staff were very positive about the provider organisation and told us that they were well supported to do their job properly.

The provider organisation had good systems in place for checking the quality of each aspect of the service and people were encouraged to become involved and influence the development of the service. Senior managers conducted unannounced audits of localised services and local managers conducted regular spot checks of care workers while they were working in people's homes. People's views were sought about the quality and reliability of service that they received.