Archived: Surecare Exeter & East Devon

At the last inspection, the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

Why the service is rated Good

People continued to receive a service that was safe. The provider followed safe recruitment procedures before new staff began working with people. There was a low staff turnover, and people received a consistent service from staff they knew well. New staff were always introduced to them before they began visiting regularly. People told us the service was reliable. A relative told us staff were always, “Very much on time, within five minutes. She always stays the right amount of time. If there is anything extra we want she will stay on and do it.”

People were protected from harm or abuse because staff had received training on safeguarding adults and were confident they could recognise any signs of abuse and knew how to report it. Risks to people’s health and safety had been assessed, and measures put in place to minimise any risks where possible. Where people required assistance with their medicines, staff were well trained and followed safe procedures. People told us staff followed good hygiene and infection control procedures and used protective equipment where needed.

People continued to receive care from staff who had the skills and knowledge required to effectively support them. Staff were well trained, received regular supervision and were well supported. Staff understood the importance of respecting people’s rights, offering choice and promoting independence.

People continued to receive care from staff who were caring. A relative told us, “They have been fantastic. We are more than happy.” People received visits from small teams of staff, who visited the same time and the same day each week. The staff had built strong relationships with people. We observed staff being kind, patient and caring. A person told us, “She’s (staff) very, very good. Very caring. I wouldn’t be without them.”

The service remained responsive to people's individual needs and provided personalised care and support. Before the service began, people’s needs were assessed with them and a care plan was drawn up and agreed setting out each task they needed support with. Staff were given information on people’s health and personal care needs. People knew how to raise a concern or complaint and told us they were confident any concerns or problems would be taken seriously and addressed immediately.

The service continued to be well led. People, staff and relatives told us the provider was approachable. Staff told us they were happy in their jobs and felt well supported. A member of staff told us, “Everything about the way [the provider] runs the company is perfect.” The provider sought people's views to make sure people received a service that met their needs. The provider had monitoring systems which enabled them to identify any areas where improvements were needed.

Further information is in the detailed findings below

Everyone we spoke with who received a service from the agency told us how staff practice respected their privacy and dignity. People told us the friendliness and professionalism of staff put them at ease.

People's care was planned and delivered effectively and met people's needs. People received a reliable service from a consistent team of care workers who knew them well. Care plans were reviewed and provided care workers with sufficient instructions covering all aspects of each person's care and support needs. There are quality assurance systems in place, and care records are accurate and up to date.

We looked at records relating to care and management of the service. We met three people with their consent, telephoned four other people's representatives and spoke with three staff, to get their views.

We found that people's privacy and dignity were respected. Individuals' views and experiences were very much taken into account in the way their care service was provided. Some were given a choice of the staff who supported them, for example.

Staff were supported to deliver care to an appropriate standard, with people receiving support that met their needs and protected their rights. One service user commented '...the staff ' I couldn't fault them. They have experience.' Another person described staff as 'very helpful, cheerful and approachable' and 'reliable.' However, care records were not always maintained properly so people were not fully protected from inappropriate care.

People told us that they felt safe with staff, and that their personal property was treated with respect. They were protected from the risk of abuse because the provider had taken reasonable steps to prevent abuse.

The provider had systems to assess the service's quality and manage risks to people who used the service and staff.