Archived: Real Life Options

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary is based on what we found during the inspection, speaking with the managers, staff members, relatives of people who used the service and from looking at records. If you want to see the evidence supporting our summary please read the full report.

Is the service safe?

People were treated with respect and dignity by staff.

Systems were in place to ensure managers and staff learned from events such as accidents, incidents and concerns. This helped to reduce the risks to people and assisted the service to continually improve. We saw staff members had received training in all relevant areas to meet the needs of people who used the service.

Staff personnel files contained all relevant information, including Disclosure & Barring Service (DBS) checks and reference checks from previous employers.

Is the service effective?

Where possible, people's care records were assessed with their involvement and with relatives and other professionals' involvement.

Is the service caring?

People's preferences, interests, aspirations and diverse needs had been recorded and care and support had been provided in accordance with people's wishes.

We saw there were mental capacity assessments or Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) in place, where a person who used the service lacked capacity. We also saw best interest decisions, which involved support workers and the care manager.

Is the service responsive?

People, or relatives of people, knew how to complain if they were unhappy or had any concerns. We received satisfaction survey results from people and their relatives in response to questionnaires sent out by the provider. One member of staff we spoke with told us; 'It's good working for Real Life Options. It's a big company but you're supported well still. If we (staff) have any issues, we go to the managers and they help'.

Is the service well-led?

The service worked well with other agencies and services to make sure people received the most suitable care. This included work with doctors, occupational therapists, district nurses and other health professionals.

The service had quality assurance systems in place. Action plans were created and completed where any issues had been identified. We saw audits of complaints and health and safety.

Staff told us they were clear about their roles and responsibilities. Staff had a good understanding of the ethos of the service. Staff were also aware of audits and observations carried out by the managers and thought these were good tools to monitor and improve service provision. This helped to ensure people received a good quality service.