Archived: Sharrow View

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary describes what people using the service, their relatives and the staff told us, what we observed and the records we looked at.

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

This is a summary of what we found:

Is the service safe?

People spoke positively about the care they received and about their carers. People said they knew who to speak to if they had any worries or concerns and were confident that action would be taken if they raised any issues. People told us that they always felt safe when then carers visited them. People said 'I feel safe with them' and 'I always feel safe with our carers.'

People told us that they felt their rights and dignity were always respected.

Systems were in place to make sure that the manager and staff learnt from accidents and incidents. Audits were being undertaken and people's views were sought. There were policies and procedures in place to deal with any complaints that may arise. This helped to ensure that the service continually improved.

The service had policies and procedures in place in relation to the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). People were assessed prior to a service commencing and on an on-going basis, this helped to ensure their rights were protected.

Procedures were in place for dealing with emergencies and staff were able to explain these to us.

Is the service effective?

People's files contained assessments, which showed that people's health, personal and social care needs were assessed before care was delivered to them at home. When people were identified as being at risk, their support plans showed the actions required to manage these risks.

People we spoke with confirmed they had a support plan in their home, which was followed by carers when they visited. People said that their support plans were up to date and reflected their current needs. Records we saw supported this. One person said 'They (carers) are all brilliant. They are all very helpful. We are very lucky.'

Staff had received training to meet the needs of people they support in the community. They had also completed mandatory training so that they could work safely with people. Staff we spoke with told us they received very 'good support' from the agency.

Is the service caring?

People we spoke with told us that they were well supported by the service. We asked them for their views about the staff that supported them. Feedback from people was very positive. We spoke with seven people who were using the service and one person whose relative used the service. We also checked some of the feedback people had provided. Everyone told us they were satisfied with the care they received and spoke positively about individual care workers. People described carers as being 'brilliant, caring, helpful and efficient.'

Is the service responsive?

People told us their care workers generally arrived on time and they stayed for the correct length of time that had been agreed. People said if they had any problems they contacted the senior carer who would make sure any issues were sorted out. People told us whenever possible they were kept informed about any changes to the usual care workers who attended to them.

There were robust systems in place to deal with complaints. People told us they knew how to make a complaint.

People we spoke with told us they knew how to make a complaint if they were unhappy. Everyone we spoke with told us they would ring the agency office. People also told us that complaints would be investigated and action taken as necessary. One person said 'If I did have a complaint I would speak with the people in charge' another person said 'I have no complaints at all' another said 'I would speak with X if I did have a complaint.'

Is the service well-led?

We saw that there was an effective and robust quality assurance system in place which meant that the service was learning from audits carried out and there was continuous improvements at the service.

Effective management systems were in place to promote and safeguard people's safety and welfare.

One relative we spoke with told us they thought the service ran well. They said 'Overall I am satisfied with the service my mum gets. Things are going ok.'

We saw from care files we looked at that the service worked well with other health care professionals and services to make sure people received the care they needed in a joined up way.

People told us staff supported them as they wished to be supported and were always polite and respectful. They also said that the staff respected their privacy and protected their dignity when providing care. They made comments such as "The service could not be improved, everything is wonderful.'

We looked at people's care records. We found that records were consistent, accurate and up to date. The records documented people's views in relation to the care and level of support they needed, and which tasks they wished to do themselves. The staff we spoke with told us how they delivered care in a person-centred way which meant people were consulted and included in decisions about their care.

People were protected against the risks associated with medicines because appropriate arrangements were in place to ensure these were managed in a safe way.

We reviewed the recruitment and selection processes and found them to be robust. This ensured that people were supported by suitably qualified, skilled and experienced staff.

This was the first inspection of the agency. We saw they had put systems in place to make sure people were safely cared for. This included policies and procedures, induction training for staff and quality monitoring systems.