7 May 2014
During a routine inspection
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?
There were risk assessments in place for people using the service in relation to their support and care provision. Therefore people were not put at unnecessary risk, however people also had choice and remained in control of their own decisions. This meant that people’s independence was promoted and they were not restricted from engaging in and accessing the wider community.
Systems were in place to make sure the manager and staff learned from events such as accidents, incidents, complaints and concerns. Policies and procedures were used to protect people from unsafe practices. This reduced the risk to people and helped the service to continually improve.
Carers received training in the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and safeguarding to ensure people were safeguarded appropriately in line with current legislation. Medication training was undertaken so carers could follow safe procedures for dealing with people’s medication.
Recruitment practices were safe and thorough and effective procedures were in place to ensure carers were suitable for the role.
Is the service effective?
People’s health and care needs were assessed at the start of the service and they were involved in compiling their own support plans. These were reviewed periodically to ensure that they were still appropriate and effective. Information had been taken into account from other professionals and organisations which demonstrated that a holistic approach was undertaken with regards to support.
Is the service caring?
People using the service and their relatives told us, “I’m very happy with [my carer]”, “everything’s brilliant, if my [family member] is happy, I’m happy” and “[the carers] give him a life they never would have, the service has worked for him”.
We saw positive interactions between the people using the service and their carers. One carer said of the people they cared for, “they’re part of my family, my life, it’s more than a job”.
People’s preferences, interests, aspirations and diverse needs had been recorded and care and support was provided in accordance with people’s wishes.
Is the service responsive?
People were supported and encouraged to complete tasks to promote their independence. People were assisted to access the community and carers helped people take part in community activities.
People told us they could make changes to their care and the service would accommodate their needs. They said they would feel comfortable in telling either a carer or a shared lives officer if they had any concerns. Carers told us that the service always responded quickly and dealt effectively with any issues they may have.
Is the service well-led?
The manager and staff worked with other agencies and services to make sure people received their care in a joined up way.
The service had a quality assurance and audit system in place and carers were monitored by the provider to ensure they were providing suitable care and support. Feedback was sought from people using the service on a regular basis so improvements could be made and good practice could be recognised.
Carers and people’s relatives all said they got good support from the manager and the shared lives team. One carer said, “It’s really well run here, I’m totally happy”.
You can see our judgements on the front page of this report.