You are here

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 21 January 2013
Date of Publication: 23 February 2013
Inspection Report published 23 February 2013 PDF

People should get safe and appropriate care that meets their needs and supports their rights (outcome 4)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Experience effective, safe and appropriate care, treatment and support that meets their needs and protects their rights.

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 21 January 2013, 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 and talked with staff.

Our judgement

People experienced care, treatment and support that met their needs and protected their rights.

Reasons for our judgement

All of the people we spoke with were complimentary about the care and support they received. One person said "They do extremely well. They seem to find good staff who know what they’re doing. They are better than [other services]”.

The people we spoke with were happy with the service they received. Three people said staff always stayed for the full amount of their allocated time. One person said “They always stay long enough”. However, one person said “Once or twice they’ve been late”.

One of the members of staff we spoke to was the agency’s trained assessor. They told us that when people made enquiries about using the agency they visited the person’s home for an initial risk assessment. This was then followed up by an in-depth assessment where people’s preferences were recorded and staff matched with people. The assessor also conducted spot checks regularly to ensure staff were delivering the level of care agreed to a high standard.

One member of staff said “We always try and go above and beyond what would normally be expected”.

We looked at daily rotas and saw that enough travelling time was given to staff between appointments. Management had considered the walking and driving distances between addresses. This meant that the management had made sure that the provision of care did not need to be rushed.

Everyone we spoke with was pleased with the staff they had. The people we spoke with said staff knew how to provide the care and support they needed.

We looked at three care plans and saw that each person had a file which included care records and risk assessments. These were clear, easy to follow and comprehensive. This meant that any staff could know the person's preferred routine. One copy was held in the person’s home and one in the office. People told us about the records and instructions kept in their home.

People told us that the staff wore a uniform and a photo identity badge when they visited their home and acted professionally. Staff told us that they wore gloves and aprons when appropriate and washed their hands at each visit.

Care records showed that each person receiving a service had undergone an initial needs assessment and that a care plan had been developed from this.

Care records showed that each person was assessed to gain a detailed overview of their medical history, care and support needs. Details such as health, medical conditions, dietary needs and medication were obtained.

Records also showed that the environment was checked for risks to make sure staff could enter the home and provide care in a safe way.

Office staff used their knowledge and the computer system to allocate the staff who would be best suited to the person. The manager explained that the business was small enough so they knew the abilities and availability of staff and knew the client group very well. The manager explained that they try to keep the same staff with the same person wherever possible. People told us that they almost always had the same carer.

We saw that care plan reviews took place every three months or sooner if appropriate. This showed that the care people received was checked to make sure it continued to meet the needs of people. The manager said these were basic timescales but were carried out more frequently when staff had highlighted changes in the person's care needs. Staff said they had been provided with sufficient information to provide quality care for people. One member of staff said “Recently I met with X and we updated their care plan with their agreement. It was a joint effort”.