Archived: Hollistic Care Limited

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?

We were told that a risk assessment was in place for the person using the service in relation to their support and care provision, however, there was no copy in place at the office. This meant it was not possible to ascertain the suitability of this and also meant necessary information integral to support was not present for people who may need to access this. In addition, a needs assessment had not been completed and support plan information was vague which meant that information was not sufficiently detailed to reflect what support was required.

Policies and procedures were in place to make sure that unsafe practice was identified and people were protected. This reduced the risk to people and helped the service to continually improve.

Staff had received training safeguarding to ensure that people were protected from risk of abuse. A relative told us they had no concerns with their family member's safety and said, "I fully trust [care worker's name] 100% and they've never proven me wrong. I have total peace of mind'.

Recruitment practices were safe, thorough and effective procedures were in place to ensure staff were suitable for the role.

Is the service effective?

Comments from a relative were all positive about the care their family member received. However, the person's health and care needs had not been formally assessed and there was no evidence that people were given the opportunity to be involved in compiling their individual support plans.

Is the service caring?

Comments from a relative included, '[the care worker] is absolutely lovely, deals with my [family member] as though it was their own [family member]'.

The care worker we spoke with demonstrated a good understanding of the person's needs and was able to give examples of how they promoted the person's independence.

Is the service responsive?

Both staff and a relative told us that the support provided was flexible to the person's needs and adjustments could be made where required such as increased visits or duration of visits.

Staff would inform the manager if they felt any change in needs was required and the support could be reviewed if required.

Is the service well-led?

The service had a quality assurance policy in place but we found that audits of information were not being undertaken at regular periods. Feedback was sought by way of customer satisfaction surveys which showed that people had the opportunity to put their views across.

Staff had recorded supervision sessions with the manager and were kept updated about any information they needed to know about the service. This helped to maintain consistency in the running of the service and to ensure staff were aware of relevant information.