8 June 2018
During a routine inspection
At our last inspection of 12 April 2016, the service was rated good overall. The key questions for safe, effective, responsive and well-led were rated good and the key question caring was rated outstanding. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good overall and the rating of outstanding in caring. There was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.
The service continued to provide an extremely caring service. Without exception, people had very positive relationships with their care workers. People’s dignity, privacy and independence were respected and promoted. People’s views were listened to and valued and as a result they were provided with a very personalised service which met their needs and preferences.
The service continued to provide people with a safe service. Risks to people continued to be managed well, including risks from abuse and in their daily lives. The service learned from incidents to improve the service. There were enough care workers to cover people’s planned care visits. Recruitment of care workers was done safely. Where people required support with their medicines, this was done safely. There were infection control procedures in place to guide care workers in how to minimise the risks of cross infection.
The service continued to provide people with an effective service. People were supported by care workers who were trained and supported to meet their needs. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and care workers cared for them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. Systems were in place to support people with their dietary needs, if required. People were supported to have access to health professionals where needed. The service worked with other organisations involved in people’s care to provide a consistent service.
The service continued to provide people with a responsive service. People received care and support which was assessed, planned and delivered to meet their individual needs. There were systems in place to support and care for people at the end of their lives, where required. A complaints procedure was in place.
The service continued to provide a well-led service. The service used comments from people and care workers to drive improvement. The service had a quality assurance system and shortfalls were identified and addressed. As a result the quality of the service continued to improve.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.