Prior to our inspection we had received a concern about the service provided which had also been sent to the provider. We brought forward our scheduled inspection of the service to check that the service had responded appropriately to this concern and taken action, where required. At the time of our inspection there were 57 people using the service. We spoke with 12 people who used the service and the relatives of five people. We also spoke with the provider, the registered manager and three staff members, including one care worker. We looked at ten people's care records. Other records viewed included five staff member's personnel records, staff meeting minutes, satisfaction questionnaires completed by the people who used the service and records relating to the quality assurance of the service. 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?
We saw that care workers were provided with training in safeguarding vulnerable adults from abuse, Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). This meant that care workers were provided with the information that they needed to ensure that people were safeguarded. The registered manager understood when a DoLS referral should be made.
People's care records included appropriate risk assessments which identified how the risks associated with providing a domiciliary care service to people were minimised.
The rota and discussions with staff showed that the service employed sufficient numbers of care workers to cover visits to the people who used the service. The service took action to address care worker vacancies, including recruiting care workers from the local area.
Care workers were provided with the training and support that they needed to meet people's needs safely and effectively.
Is the service effective?
People told us that they felt that they were provided with a service that met their needs. One person said, "I can't fault them at all." Another person said, "It (the service) is brilliant, could not be any better." Another person said, "They are an excellent company, I can't praise them enough."
People's care records showed that care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure their safety and welfare. The records were regularly reviewed and updated which meant that care workers were provided with up to date information about how people's needs were to be met.
Is the service caring?
People told us that the care workers treated them with respect. One person said, "They (care workers) are a joy, always come in cheerful." Another person said, "They (care workers) are very pleasant and compassionate, which is very important when caring for the elderly."
People using the service completed satisfaction questionnaires. Where shortfalls or concerns were raised these were addressed.
Is the service responsive?
People told us that they knew how to make a complaint if they were unhappy. We saw that where people had raised concerns appropriate action had been taken to address them.
People's care records showed that where concerns about their wellbeing had been identified the care workers had taken appropriate action. This ensured that people were provided with the support they needed. This included supporting people to obtain an appointment with health care professionals, including a doctor.
Is the service well-led?
The service had a quality assurance system and records showed that identified shortfalls were addressed promptly. As a result the quality of the service was continuingly improving.