Archived: Serenity - Birmingham

We spoke to five people or their relatives out of 15 people receiving a service from Serenity-Birmingham. They all told us they received a good service. Amongst their comments were: "I cannot fault them" and "It is an excellent service." People told us care staff visited at the time that they were supposed to and stayed for the right length of time. Records we looked at confirmed this and staff told us that appropriate arrangements had been made so they could get to visits on time. There were enough staff to provide appropriate care for people.

People told us that care staff knew about their health conditions and knew how to support them. They told us that staff were caring and would contact health professionals for them if their health was failing. Care records showed that appropriate plans were in place for care staff to provide good personal care and to respond in emergencies. Care staff at the time of this inspection were receiving training in 'end of life' or dementia care where this was appropriate to meet the needs of people. They told us that received support in the form of regular meetings with managers.

People who use the service were protected from the risk of abuse, because the provider had taken reasonable steps to identify the possibility of abuse and prevent abuse from happening.

Serenity Homecare Limited operated a service across both Birmingham and Leicester. There had been no new people receiving a service since our last visit. We reviewed the care records for four people receiving either home care services in Leicester or Birmingham. We checked the systems in place to monitor: people's satisfaction with the service provided the training of and the competence of staff and the service's response to complaints. Overall, we found that better systems and processes were in place. The provider was monitoring the care provided and had ensured that views from the people who were receiving the service were being listened and responded to.

People's views of the service varied. Some people were happy with the service supplied and received a good support. Other people told us they had problems receiving the service as commissioned and agreed when they first received the service. Some people told us that they continued to have this difficulty. People named individual staff members that they thought were very knowledgeable and kind; and also named other staff that they had concerns about.

The provider did not have an effective complaints management process in place to ensure that concerns or complaints received were investigated and responded to appropriately.

The service's records showed that people did not always receive services at the times that had been agreed and there were poor systems in place for monitoring that people had a visit and a visit at the time agreed. Arrangements were not always made to cover visits when the service was unable to provide the care at the time agreed and this put people at risk of harm. Staff did not always have the care plan to refer to when providing care and this meant that people with significant health concerns could receive inconsistent care and support.