During this inspection we spoke to eight people who used the service, a relative, four staff and three health and social care professionals. We considered all the evidence we gathered under the outcomes we inspected. We used the information to answer the five questions we always ask;
' Is the service caring?
' Is the service responsive?
' Is the service safe?
' Is the service effective?
' Is the service well led?
Below is a summary of what we found. The summary describes what we found and what people using the service, their relatives and the staff told us.
If you want to see the evidence that supports our summary please read the full report.
Is the service caring?
People said the care workers who supported them were 'kind and friendly'. We saw that care workers were aware of people's individual needs and preferences.
The people we spoke with said they were 'satisfied' with the care provided at the scheme. One person told us, 'They help me with my meals. I can manage most other things myself, but they are always very helpful.'
The comments from healthcare professionals and other visitors included,'staff are very caring' and 'staff's attitude towards people seems genuinely caring and warm'.
Discussions with people and the records we looked at showed that people had been involved in agreeing their care service. We found people's individual preferences for care and support had been taken into account.
Is the service responsive?
People were asked for their views on a regular basis. People told us they felt comfortable about discussing any issues or requests to change their care package.
People's care plans were individually designed around the times and support tasks that each person needed. People told us that they always received their planned visits. Some people commented that the service did not respond quickly to calls that were outside of their planned visit, for example if they were in the communal lounge. The service acknowledged that people may have to wait if staff were already on a planned call to another person using the service, but that all calls were responded to.
People and visitors told us they knew how to raise any issues. People said they would feel 'comfortable' about making any comments. One person told us, 'I would tell them in the office if I wasn't happy with something.'
Visiting healthcare professionals told us that the staff were responsive to people's changes in needs. One healthcare professional told us, 'My client's needs have increased so they changed the care package to support her with this. It means they provide more support so she can stay in her own flat.'
Is the service safe?
People told us they felt 'comfortable' with the agency staff and they felt 'safe' at this scheme. People were provided with clear, written information about how to raise any concerns or complaints.
Before anyone received a care service their needs were assessed by senior staff. The assessments included each person's care needs, their medication, moving and assisting needs, and the safety of their home environment. This meant any risks to people's safety were identified and assessed to ensure that appropriate care and support was provided to keep them safe.
The scheme made sure there was sufficient staff to carry out all the planned visits to meet people's needs. There were also contingency arrangements to cover any gaps or emergencies.
The provider and senior staff understood people's rights to make their own decisions, in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005.
Is the service effective?
Each person had an individual care plan which set out their specific care needs. People told us they were included in agreements about their care. People had copies of their own care plans and assessments in their apartments.
A healthcare professional told us, 'The service always gets in touch straight away if there any changes in my client's needs. They always contact medical professionals if they are concerned about her health.'
Another healthcare professional commented, 'They look after my client really well. They support her to keep living an independent lifestyle even though she has very complex needs.'
Is the service well-led?
The scheme had a registered manager who managed the daily care service. The registered manager was leaving the week after this inspection visit and the provider wrote to us to tell us how senior managers would support the scheme until a new manager could be appointed.
The provider was a national organisation that had a system to assure the quality of the service it provided. A quality assurance manager visited the scheme to check whether it could be improved.
People and staff felt they were regularly involved and were consulted about the service. The scheme used monthly satisfaction questionnaires to get the views of people who used the service.