A single inspector carried out this inspection. The focus of the inspection was to answer five key questions: Is the service safe? Is the service effective? Is the service caring? Is the service responsive? Is the service well-led?
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 that supports our summary, please read the full report.
This is a summary of what we found:
Is the service safe?
We looked at ten staff recruitment files for support workers. There were effective recruitment and selection processes in place. We responded to information a person had made to the Care Quality Commission that 'Staff are not trained and don't know what they are doing.' Eight of the nine people who were supported by the agency with whom we spoke, told us 'Staff are knowledgeable.' During our inspection we saw the way staff were recruited and trained was safe.
All nine people told us they felt safe in their own homes with staff caring for them.
Due to insufficient information in people's risk assessments the provider could not be certain that they were protecting people from harm. The lack of detail meant staff were inadequately informed of people's needs and how to maintain their safety whilst providing care. Although the provider informed us they had not had any accidents as a result and were obliging to review all risk assessments.
Is the service effective?
All people who were supported by the agency told us that staff help them maintain their independence. One person told us 'If it wasn't for the agency helping me remain independent I would have to live in a nursing home.' We saw the way in which people were cared for was effective in keeping them living independently at home.
We saw and heard complaints made about the consistency of the staff from comments made by people and in the service reviews and when we asked people during the inspection. The provider may wish to note, three out of the ten care files revealed that roughly twelve different staff had visited these people in a two week period. We saw the service could be more effective and consistent when allocating and scheduling staff.
Is the service caring?
We were told staff went 'Above and beyond' from their caring duties and would do tasks that were not always their responsibility, like feeding their pets and buying pet food.
Eight of the nine people who were supported by the agency with whom we spoke, told us they were very happy with the care. All nine told us care staff do not rush and are always on time. People told us staff were 'Friendly' and 'Polite'.
Is the service responsive?
One person told us they had complained and it was all dealt with and resolved in a timely manner.
We saw in some appraisals staff had told the employer the only other training they would like was a dementia course. We saw the provider had recently employed a registered mental health nurse to provide training to all staff on dementia and it was a four day course. Staff told us that this was 'Really useful and interesting.' We saw all appraisals had been completed annually and most supervisions had been completed.
All the service reviews we looked at had been completed in the past six months. People told us staff came out at least once a year to review the package of care. In the care files we saw evidence that all ten people had said they were happy with the service. One person had said they would prefer more consistent staff members and two people had said they would prefer new care staff to be introduced to them first before they start working for them. When asking people about this they said all matters had been resolved and that the staff were mindful of being more consistent. One person had commented that 'Young care staff do not engage'. There was no evidence or documentation of any follow up on this occasion.
Is the service well-led?
All of the people we spoke with told us they knew the manager well and had confidence in their management of the service. They told us they would have no hesitation in speaking with them. They told us they had no concerns over the management of the service and they felt the manager would deal with any concerns in a prompt manner. They all felt the manager was 'Approachable' and 'Easy to talk to'.