Archived: Scott Care Limited (Medway Branch)

During this inspection, we set out to answer our five questions; Is the service caring? Is the service responsive? Is the service safe? Is the service effective? Is the service well led?

Below is a summary of what we found. If you wish to see the evidence supporting our summary please read the full report.

Is the service safe?

We found that the service provided by the agency was safe. We looked at how medicines were managed and found that where problems were identified they were addressed. We spoke with the manager of the service and senior staff about the management of medicines and improvements that needed to be made to practice.

We found that they had a robust recruitment procedure that they were following to ensure the people they had employed were suitable to work with vulnerable people in their own homes.

Is the service caring?

People were supported by staff who were kind and attentive. All of the people we spoke with told us that the staff were polite and friendly. We saw cards and letters received by the service from people expressing their thanks for the care they had received. One person thanked the service for 'All the help your staff have given me' and a relative said they wanted to thank the service for 'All the kindness' they had shown to their family member.

Is the service effective?

We found that most people who used the service felt that it met their needs. People told us that the care was good and one person commented on the willingness of their staff as 'They offer to do anything else I want as well'. Relatives we spoke with told us that care was delivered in line with assessed needs.

Is the service responsive?

People's needs had been assessed before they started using the service. When their needs changed, care plans were updated to reflect what support was required. We saw that systems were in place for reviewing care plans. Assessments were detailed and reflected a range of care needs such as mobility and sensory impairment.

Is the service well-led?

People told us they were able to raise concerns with the manager. We saw that suitable systems were in place to assess and monitor the quality of the service. This included spot checks, telephone surveys and questionnaires for people who used the service and their relatives and monitoring of significant events by the manager of the service.

People said that they were involved in their care and treatment. They said that staff respected their privacy and dignity and helped them to maintain or regain their independence. Comments included, 'They're very good and very polite'; and 'They shave him and bathe him which is really important to him'.

People said that their or their relatives' individual needs were met, that staff carried out the support tasks contained in their plan of care and that the service was flexible. People were very complimentary about the skills of the staff team. One person told us, 'It is an exceptional service', and another person said, 'They're really there for me, I've nothing to grumble about and my regular carer is very good and I can rely on her'.

The agency undertook a series of checks when recruiting new staff, but on occasion it did not follow its own procedures.

People said that they felt safe when being supported by staff. Staff knew how to raise concerns with the agency. Staff, did not clearly demonstrate that they knew who to contact if the agency did not act on their concerns. Immediate action was taken to address this.

People were regularly contacted to provide feedback on the level of the service that they received.