Is the service safe?
This is a summary of what we found-
Is it safe?
People told us they felt safe with care staff. People’s needs were assessed and care was delivered in line with their needs. Staff were knowledgeable about people's needs and how to meet them.
An emergency plan was in place which enabled staff to provide care to people in the event of foreseeable emergencies such as in extreme weather conditions.
Is the service safe?
Is the service effective?
Is the service caring?
Is the service responsive?
Is the service well-led?
This is a summary of what we found-
Is it safe?
We found that not all aspects of the service were safe. Staff working for the agency had completed training in the safeguarding of vulnerable adults. They were aware of how to handle concerns about people’s safety and were confident to do so. Robust recruitment processes ensured staff employed at the agency were subject to the necessary checks on their suitability to work with vulnerable adults. People told us they felt safe with care staff.
However, care was not always planned and delivered in an appropriate way to ensure the welfare and safety of people. We have asked the provider to tell us what they are going to do to meet the requirements of the law in relation to ensuring people’s care is delivered safely.
Is it effective?
The delivery of care was not always effective. People we spoke with said their needs were met. People had individual care plans, however, some of these lacked detail about the risks to people’s health and welfare and how these should be managed. Staff knew people’s needs, although records showed people did not always receive the care they required according to their care plan. For example, records of care for two people showed staff did not apply creams in the way outlined in the person’s care plan. We have asked the provider to tell us what they are going to do to meet the requirements of the law in relation to ensuring people receive the care they require.
Is it caring?
The service is caring. People commented positively about the care they received. One person said, “[the carer] is wonderful”. Another person said, “I’d recommend them to anyone”. Relatives also told us they were satisfied with the way care was delivered. One relative told us, “I totally trust them”. Other comments we heard included, “they are lovely”, “they are all different, but they’re all very nice”, and “they are like old friends”.
Is it responsive?
The service is responsive. People’s views on their care were regularly sought and their feedback was acted on. There were sufficient staff to ensure people received the care they required.
When staff absences were unforeseen, the agency had capacity to ensure people’s care was delivered consistently. People told us they were informed if care staff were delayed. One person told us, “they’ve accommodated requests to change times or explained why they haven’t been able to, which has been fine”. People told us they received regular care from a team of care staff. One person said, “the ones I’ve got at the moment are as regular as clockwork”. Other people told us, particularly at weekends, the care worker was often different from the one they had been told was coming.
Is it well-led?
The quality of the service provided was monitored regularly and where improvements or concerns were identified, these were carried out in a timely manner. Staff supervision and spot-checks on the standard of care provided were carried out regularly. Areas for improvement were recorded and acted on.
Team meetings allowed staff to feedback about the service, and to receive information about how to improve the quality of the care provided.