Archived: Stanmore Caring Services

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary describes what people using the service, their relatives and the staff told us, what we observed, and the records we looked at. If you want to see the evidence which supports our summary please read the full report.

We spoke with two of the people who used the service, one relative, and the registered manager.

Is the service safe?

Procedures were in place to protect people from abuse. Staff were knowledgeable about safeguarding vulnerable people and would be able to respond appropriately to allegations or suspicions of abuse or neglect. The registered manager understood their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

People's needs, including any risks to their health and well-being had been individually assessed and their care and treatment planned and delivered in accordance with a person centred approach.

Procedures were in place for dealing with emergencies and staff had been trained in safety related subjects so they could meet people's needs.

We saw that systems were in place to protect people against the risks associated with medicines.

Is the service effective?

People's health and care needs had been assessed with them, and they were involved in planning their own care and support. All specific needs were identified and detailed in the care plans for staff to follow.

People we spoke with were pleased with the level of care they received.

Is the service caring?

Both people we spoke with told us they felt safe in the care of staff. The family member we spoke with told us they felt their family was in safe hands in the care of staff.

People and the family member were all positive about staff. People told us staff were, 'Excellent, it is an extremely good service and they are keeping us happy. Staff arrive on time, are conscientious (wishing to do one's work thoroughly and well) and make sure everything is done.' Another person told us, 'Everything is 100% satisfactory.' One family member said, 'Staff are wonderful.'

People's preferences, interests and dietary choices were recorded, and care and support was provided in accordance with the wishes of people using the service and their families.

Is the service responsive?

People and a family member told us they knew how to complain. We saw there was a process in place to respond to any issues of concern. People told us staff were responsive to their needs during the visit.

Is the service well-led?

We saw from the documentation and discussions with people, one family member, and the registered manager there were both informal and formal systems to quality assure the service.

All members of staff we spoke with were clear about their roles and responsibilities.

We looked at how the service reduced the risk of people receiving unsafe and inappropriate care. A relative told us 'my relative always tells me good things. He would tell me immediately if anything was wrong'. The care needs of people had been assessed, together with actions for minimising potential risks.

We asked questions to examine if people were protected from abuse, or the risk of abuse. A relative commented, 'I would be much worried if they [carers] were not there'. The manager and staff were aware of procedures to follow in the event of abuse or an allegation.

We assessed if the health and welfare of people were met by staff who were fit and appropriately qualified. A relative had told us, they were 'very pleased' with staff. The service had a recruitment policy and procedure, which had been followed.

Staff had received essential training and support to enable them to do their work. They understood the needs of people and how to meet them. Asked whether staff were competent, a relative told us 'extremely'.