Archived: Aspirations Southeast Children

Our inspection on 6 August 2014 was to follow up non-compliance from the last inspection on 11 February 2014. We had asked the provider to send us an action plan telling us how they intended to address the shortcomings and what they would do to make the required improvements. They sent us details of improvements to their care planning process on 19 February 2014.

As part of our follow up inspection we looked at the improvements made to care records for six children and young people who used the service. We looked at improvements to care and welfare, training and support of staff and quality assurance systems. We spoke to four family members who used the service and two staff.

We considered our inspection findings to answer questions we always ask; Is the service safe? Is the service effective? Is the service caring? Is the service responsive? Is the service well-led?

This is a summary of what we found;

Is the service safe?

The care provision and support to families had been improved. Staff had up to date relevant information about the children and young people who they supported in order to maintain their health, independence and protect them from harm. People we spoke with told us that they trusted the staff to care for their child or young person safely. One person said, 'I really trust them and so does [my child].

Is the service effective?

The assessments for children and young people showed that their care, support and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that ensured that their needs were being met. Young people and their families were involved in their care arrangements. This made their care more effective as they had some control over its delivery. One person said, 'There are not so many missed calls now as the agency seem to have the right staff.'

Systems for the training and supervision of staff were in place. This ensured that the service was more effective as staff had the necessary skills and support to carry out their role.

Is the service caring?

The manager, care coordinator and staff we spoke with had a good knowledge of children and young people's care needs and circumstances, likes and dislikes. They offered a personalised and individual service and spoke about people in a kind, caring and professional way. Family members told us that their children were well cared for and the staff were "lovely, funny and gentle."

Is the service responsive?

The service was responsive to the needs of people who used the service. The staff worked flexibly to enable the children and young people to maintain their independence and to give family carers a break from caring. One person said, 'They really are a lifeline for us and nothing is too much trouble.'

A range of health and social care professionals from the community were involved in people's care. This showed that people received their care in a joined up way.

Is the service well-led?

Systems were now in place for the effective monitoring of the service. This included care planning and risk assessments, staff support and dealing with and learning from incidents. This ensured that families were getting a quality service from staff who were skilled at managing it. People we spoke with told us that the service had improved and they were satisfied that their child was well cared for and supported by trained staff.

We saw that the service was developing a robust approach to planning people's care and support, but that there were still improvements needed to ensure people's safety and the effectiveness of the service.

We found that staff hade been properly recruited to ensure that people received care from staff who had been robustly vetted.

We found that improvements were needed to ensure that new staff had a consistently robust induction and were fully supported when they started work for the service.

Staff had access to training but were not properly supported in their roles through effective supervision and checks on their work.

We found that people had opportunities to comment on the service. There was a clear complaints process in place so people could raise any concerns that they might have.

Overall we found that there was an improving picture at the service and people were working hard to establish and maintain good and safe systems and practices. However further improvements were needed to ensure that the service was effective, safe and well led.