Archived: Allied Healthcare Mitcham

We asked the provider to send us a report by 14 July 2014, setting out the action they would take to meet this standard. They wrote to us on 02 July 2014 with a plan which set out how they intended to make these improvements. They said they would do these by 15 August 2014.

We returned to the service on 24 September 2014 to check whether the provider had made the necessary improvements.

We considered our inspection findings to answer the question: Is the service safe? Below is a summary of what we found. The summary is based on reviewing records and speaking with four senior or office-based staff. If you want to see the evidence supporting our summary please read the full report.

Is the service safe?

We found that improvements had been made to recording and auditing, however MAR were not being created and checked before use in accordance with the provider's policy.This placed people at risk of unsafe administration of medicines.

If you want to see the evidence supporting our summary please read the full report.

We considered our inspection findings to answer five questions we always ask:

' Is the service safe?

' Is the service caring?

' Is the service responsive?

' Is the service effective?

' Is the service well led?

Is the service safe?

We found the agencies' safeguarding procedures were robust and care workers understood how to safeguard the vulnerable people they supported. There were enough suitably competent care workers employed to meet the needs of the people who used the service. Care workers were well supported to deliver care to people.

However, systems in place to protect people from the risks of unsafe medication management were ineffective. We have asked the provider to tell us what they are going to do to meet the requirements of the law in relation to the management of medicines.

Is the service caring?

People using service told us that care workers asked for their consent before they carried out care related tasks. We found that care workers had a good understand of the need to ask for consent.

Is the service responsive?

We found that the agency had responded promptly and appropriately to allegations of abuse regarding people using the service.

Is the service effective?

People's needs were assessed regularly. People had care plans in place which they had been involved in creating. We found that care was delivered in line with these care plans.

Is the service well-led?

The provider had effective systems in place to routinely gather the views of the people who used the service and all care workers. Systems were in place to effectively assess and monitor the quality of the care delivered. This meant the views of people were taken into account in the way the service was provided.

However some people said it was difficult to find out which carers were coming to support them especially at weekends. One person said 'I have a very good carer but if she is not coming I have to ring up to find out who is, the office is not always organised and there is a lack of communication'. Another person said 'There have been a lot of changes lately and it's difficult sometimes to find out who is coming'.

All of the people using the service or their relatives that we spoke to said they had been consulted about their or their relatives care needs. Some people said they had been involved in drawing up the support plans and risk assessments.

All of the people we spoke to told us they would contact staff at the office if they wanted to raise a concern or make a complaint.

The provider had an effective system to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people received.

Comments from relatives of people who use the service included 'the staff are very good, they do what they are supposed to do, we get good support from the office', and 'care staff turn up on time'.