We carried out an inspection to help us answer 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. The summary is based on our findings during the inspection, discussions with two of the people using the service, four care staff and two supervising managers. We looked at five people's care records. If you wish to see the evidence supporting our summary please read the full report.
The service was safe. People who used the service told us that they felt safe. One person told us, "I feel 100% safe with the support staff, they are all so lovely". Safeguarding procedures were in place and staff spoken with showed they understood their role in safeguarding the people they supported. Staff were aware of the provider's whistleblowing policy.
People's independence, rights and choices were protected because the provider had procedures in place to gain people's consent to the care and support they received.
Staff knew about risk management plans and we saw that they supported people in line with those plans. This meant that people were supported with their care needs in a way that was intended to ensure their safety.
The manager ensured that staff rotas were planned in advance to maintain the staffing levels required. Extra support could be made available if necessary. Systems were in place to make sure that accidents, incidents and complaints were recorded and acted on as soon as possible and checks were made on aspects of the service. This enabled the management to make changes when required to improve the service provided.
The service was effective because people's care needs were assessed with them. All of the people we spoke with told us they were involved in their care planning. We saw that care plans were updated as required should changes to needs occur. People had been assessed for capacity where required and staff were aware of the need of a best interest meeting if the need arose.
Where people had complex needs that required the input of specialist health care services, assessments had been made by the appropriate professionals. Their recommendations were carried out by the staff. This meant the provider worked with other services to ensure people's health care needs were met.
The service was caring because people were supported by care staff that were kind and caring. We saw that care staff gave people encouragement and respected their privacy and dignity. One person told us, "I am always treated with respect by all the staff".
People's preferences, interests and diverse needs had been recorded and care and support was provided in accordance with people's wishes.
The service was responsive. People were asked their views about the service and the provider acted on comments and suggestions that people made.
Where care staff had noticed people's changing needs, their care plans were updated to reflect this. This was because staff discussed people's care needs with them on a regular basis. People told us staff would always do their best to make sure they were happy. The staff spoken with told us that their times on visits were very flexible and if a person needed more than the allocated time, they were supported to stay and complete what was felt necessary. Other visits were then offered to other carers to ensure all care needs were met.
The service was well led. The provider had quality assurance and risk management systems in place.
The provider sought the views of people who used the service after the completion of each package. Records seen by us showed that people had been very happy with the service provided.
Staff told us they were clear about their roles and responsibilities and understood the quality assurance and risk management systems. This helped to ensure that people received a good quality of care. Staff told us the service was well organised and they felt supported by their manager.