Archived: Sun Health Care Domiciliary Care Services

We considered all the evidence against the outcomes we inspected to help answer our five key questions; Is the service safe? Is the service effective? Is the service caring? Is the service responsive? Is the service well led?

Below is a summary of what we found. If you want to see the evidence supporting our summary please read the full report.

Is the service safe?

There were risk assessments in place for people using the service in relation to their support and care provision. People were not put at unnecessary risk, had choices and remained in control of their own decisions. This meant peoples' independence was promoted whilst their safety was maintained.

Systems were in place to make sure managers and staff learned from events such as accidents, incidents, complaints and concerns. Policies and procedures were in place to make sure that unsafe practice was identified and people were protected.

Staff received training in the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) to ensure that where required, decisions made on behalf of people were in their best interests and in line with code of practice.

There were suitable arrangements in place to manage medicines. People got their required medication when they needed it which was administered safely by trained staff.

Is the service effective?

Peoples' health and care needs were assessed with them and they were involved in compiling their own support plans. Information had been taken into account from other professionals and organisations which demonstrated a holistic approach was undertaken into peoples' support.

Staff received mandatory and specific training relevant to their role. They told us they felt supported by management and we saw regular supervisions and appraisals took place. Staff said they would be able to undertake further training if they wished to. This showed that staff had opportunities to progress and develop within their roles.

Is the service caring?

During our visit we saw support workers interacted positively and gave encouragement when supporting people. People using the service told us, 'I'm happy with everything', 'everything's ok, no problems' and 'I don't like it when I have staff I don't know but I tell [the manager] and they sort it out'.

People's preferences, interests, aspirations and diverse needs had been recorded and care and support had been provided in accordance with people's wishes.

Is the service responsive?

People were supported and encouraged to complete activities they enjoyed and undertake tasks to promote their independence. One comment we saw in response to a satisfaction questionnaire was, 'I am always supported to be interactive with peers and staff and be involved in as many activities as possible and given choices about what I want to do and where I go'. Everyone we spoke with told us they made their own choices.

People knew how to make a complaint if they were unhappy and said they would tell staff and would feel comfortable in doing so. People told us they felt staff respected them and their choices.

Is the service well-led?

The service worked with other agencies and services to make sure people received their care in a joined up way.

There were quality assurance processes in place which included monthly monitoring visits and internal audits by the manager and senior staff. Feedback was sought by way of satisfaction surveys sent to people, staff and stakeholders. However, the results of these surveys were not currently being feedback to people. The manager and quality assurance manager told us this was something they would consider implementing in future.

Staff were clear about their roles and responsibilities. Discussions on best practice, improved ways of working and knowledge sharing were common throughout formal team meetings and informal discussions.

People experienced care, treatment and support that met their needs and protected their rights. For example, one member of staff told us that the person they supported, liked different staff to do different tasks with them, as each of the different staff members had different strengths, which the person was aware of.

People who used the service were protected from the risk of abuse, because the provider had taken reasonable steps to identify the possibility of abuse and prevent abuse from happening.

People were cared for, or supported by, suitably qualified, skilled and experienced staff.

The provider had an effective system to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people received.