The purpose of this inspection was to find out five key questions. 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 is based on our observations during the inspection, seeking experience and views from people who used the service and the staff supporting them and from looking at records.
The service was registered in August 2013. It was providing services to a small group of fifty people and had fifteen staff members.
If you want to see the evidence supporting our summary please read the full report.
Is the service safe?
We spoke with four people who used the service and asked them if they felt safe with the service they received and with the person who supported them. Comments included 'I feel very safe when we are together, my carer is very considerate', 'I look forward to my visits, as it can get lonely. I feel completely safe' and 'My relative feels safe in their hands and we feel reassured knowing they are there. They never miss a visit and they're never late'.
The service had policies and procedures in relation to the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). No applications had needed to be submitted this year. The manager had been trained to understand when an application should be made, and how to submit one.
There were effective systems in place if it was assessed that people did not have capacity and best interest decisions were made through a multi-agency approach. All staff understood this and why this was important to people they supported.
Is the service effective?
People received appropriate care and support because there were effective systems in place to assess, plan, implement, monitor and evaluate people's needs. People were involved throughout these processes. This ensured their needs were clearly identified and the support they received was meaningful and person centred.
The service provision was developing in stages so that they could ensure continuity and consistency in the care. This included ensuring that each person using the service only had a maximum of two carers visiting/supporting them.
Is the service caring?
Staff had a good awareness of individuals' needs and treated people in a warm and respectful manner. We spoke with four staff and asked them about their experiences about the people they supported. Comments included 'I really feel like I make a difference my clients look forward to my visits and it is rewarding', 'I have a lovely relationship with my client built of trust and respect' and 'I am incredibly proud of what we do and that we put a smile on people's faces'.
The manager, team leader and staff were knowledgeable about people's lives before they started using the service. Every effort was made to enhance this knowledge so that their life experiences remained meaningful.
Is the service responsive?
Regular monitoring and reviews meant that referrals had been made to appropriate health and social care professionals and where necessary packages of care had been changed to accurately reflect people's needs.
Because the service was new they had not commenced their annual surveys to people who used the service at the time of our inspection. They were in the process of completing customer care calls to all their clients in the first six months to gain feedback on their experience of the service they received.
Is the service well-led?
The organisation and manager had increased their client and staff group slowly to help ensure that current policies and procedures that were in place were 'robust, effective and meaningful' to people who used the service.
The manager, team leader and staff continued to look at the needs of people who used the service and ways to improve these for people. Because it was a small service with a small staff team, people's views and preferences were sought on a daily basis.