Archived: Creative Support - Kendal Service

' 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. We contacted, after obtaining their permission, people who used this agency. We did this to ask them about their experiences of using the service and the support and care the agency had provided. We also spoke with the provider and care staff who worked for the agency about their work. The summary is based on our observations during the inspection, speaking with the staff, people who used the service, relatives and from looking at records.

Is the service safe?

We found that people with capacity to consent to care and treatment had consented to their care plans. This meant that people were able to give informed consent to their treatment and care. However where it was deemed people lacked capacity to agree care and treatment we did not see any assessment of capacity had been carried out. Appropriate checks to ascertain whether relatives could make decisions for people who used the service had not been carried out. This meant that people may be at risk of others not acting in their best interest.

Is the service effective?

We looked at eight people's individual care records. For one person's records we saw that the care plan held at the agency's office had not been reviewed since 2012. The care plan we looked at was not reflective of the most up to date information. Three other reviews of care we saw did not all correspond with risk assessments or audits of the care plan, specifically about people medications. This meant that if staff needed to refer to the plan for guidance it was not always clear what support was to be provided.

Is the service caring ?

The relatives and people we spoke with told us they were 'very happy' with the service provided and said the support provided was 'really good'. One person who used the service we spoke with said, 'The staff are very good and I feel comfortable with them coming into my home'. They also told us that staff were appropriately trained to meet their individual needs. All of the comments made by people we spoke with were very positive about the staff and care they received.

Is the service well-led?

The senior staff undertook spot check practice visits. This provided the opportunity to speak to people who used the services in their own home and ensure that paperwork was completed properly by staff and that it was up to date. We saw records to show that weekly memos were sent to staff to share information. We saw that regular supervisions took place, including the direct monitoring of support being delivered to people.

Is the service responsive?

We saw that through the records kept about incidents learning from them was implemented to keep people safe. We saw that audits of a number of processes were completed on a regular basis. The system of regular audits or checks ensured people were receiving safe and appropriate care.

The care plans we looked at were person centred and included individual's preferences in how their support was to be given. One person we spoke with told us, 'If I need to change my plans for the day, I just speak to the manager and it get's sorted'.

We saw safeguarding policies and procedures were in place. We reviewed records that showed staff had received training during induction to help them recognise and respond to any signs of abuse or neglect. Staff we spoke with could tell us what action they should take to protect people from harm.

We reviewed the recruitment records of five staff and found that they had been recruited using an effective procedure that included all of the appropriate checks to ensure that the person being employed was of good character.

We saw records for incidents that had been dealt with appropriately and any actions to prevent reoccurrence had been identified.