Archived: Generations Care Ltd

When we inspected the service it had only been operating for approximately six months. This was our first inspection of the service. We spoke with a Director, referred to as the manager in this report. The Registered Manager was on annual leave at the time of our visit. We also spoke with two members of staff who provided personal care to people who used the service.

We spoke with three people who used the service or their relatives. We looked at records. Below is a summary of what we found. If you want to see the evidence supporting our summary please read the full report.

Is the service safe?

The staff we spoke with understood the procedures they needed to follow to ensure that people were safe. They were able to describe the different ways that people might experience abuse and the correct steps to take if they were concerned that abuse had taken place.

Recruitment procedures were rigorous and thorough. We looked to see whether there were the right levels of staff working at the service. We looked at staff numbers and staff training. These showed there were enough staff to meet people's needs at all times.

Systems were in place to make sure that managers and staff learnt from events such as accidents and incidents, complaints, concerns, whistle-blowing and investigations. This reduced the risks to people and helped the service to improve.

We checked whether people's medicines were being managed safely. We found people's medication was being appropriately administered and safely managed.

Safeguarding procedures were robust. The service had policies and procedures in place relation to the Mental Capacity Act and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLs). Relevant staff were trained to understand when applications of this nature should be made.

Is the service effective?

People's health and care needs were assessed before they used the service to determine their needs and make sure the service could meet them effectively.

We saw arrangements were in place for care plans to be reviewed regularly to make sure information about people's care and support needs remained appropriate and accurate.

It was clear from speaking with staff they had a good understanding of people's care and support needs and that they knew them well.

Is the service caring?

People and relatives we spoke with were positive about the care provided by staff. One relative told us, 'They look after X, we are really pleased.'

People told us they felt safe using the service and with the staff that visited them. One person told us, 'The staff are really nice."

Is the service responsive?

People who used the service, their relatives and other professionals involved with the service were able to comment on the service provided. There was a Service User Guide (SUG) given to all of the people who used the service. This contained information about how to contact the office and how people could give feedback about their care. The service told us they intended to undertake six monthly customer satisfaction surveys to gain customer feedback on a regular basis.

We looked at how complaints had been dealt with at the service and found that complaints were investigated and dealt with in a timely way.

Is the service well-led?

The service had a quality assurance system in place to identify areas of improvement. Records we saw showed improvements identified had been addressed promptly. As a result, the quality of the service was continuously improving.

We found people's personal care records were up to date and complete.

There were processes and systems in place to monitor the service provided. The provider used the information gathered through these processes to assess and improve the quality of service for people.

Staff understood their roles and received support and training on a regular basis to ensure they were competent to provide care and support to the required standard.