ResCare

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

Caring – this means we looked for evidence that the provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

This is the first assessment for this service. This key question has been rated good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

This service scored 70 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider always treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect. Relatives told us staff were kind and supportive and comments included, [Registered manager name] and staff are kind and caring and treat [Person name] with respect.” People were supported by a small and consistent care team, including the provider, who were described as ‘kind and caring’ and they said, “They always knock on my door before coming in.”

We observed staff engaging with people respectfully and demonstrating kindness at all times. Staff were attentive, demonstrated a clear understanding of individuals’ preferred support needs, and used appropriate friendly conversation to create a positive and welcoming atmosphere. Staff also provided examples of how they promoted and respected people’s dignity and privacy and said, “To give them privacy by closing the door when they’re changing or getting ready for the bath; encourage them to cover themselves when coming out of their room to get into the bath.”

The provider treated people as individuals and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences.People’s individual needs and preferences were well understood by the provider and staff, such as their abilities, aspirations, culture and protected characteristics. Relatives told us and records showed their family member’s care needs were met. A relative said, “I've told staff how [Person name] like things to be done so it's comfortable and like their routine at home. ResCare are keeping to the same routine so that’s probably why they have been comfortable staying there.”

People’s communication needs were assessed and understood by staff and supported. We observed staff treated a person as an individual; they were patient, kind, listened to the individual and communicated in a respectful way.

The provider and staff promoted people’s independence by supporting them to understand their rights and make choices about their care. However, decision-making processes were not consistently evidenced within care records.

Relatives reported that their family member was supported to remain as independent as possible, having control over their day-to-day lives. Staff described promoting independence by offering choices, explaining tasks before undertaking them, and involving people in decisions about their care. They tailored support to help individuals pursue their interests and aspirations and routinely checked preferences and provided support in a way that maintained dignity and encouraged autonomy.

Care records showed people were supported to make daily choices; however, it was not always clearly evidenced that people’s understanding was reviewed regularly. While staff practice reflected focused on independence and choice, care documentation required improvement to fully demonstrate lawful decision-making. Where people lacked capacity to consent to aspects of their care, there was no documented evidence of best interest decisions. As a result, the provider could not always demonstrate that people’s rights and choices were supported in line with legal requirements. The provider acknowledged this and demonstrated a willingness to strengthening documentation will help ensure what staff do in practice is fully reflected in written records and aligned with legal requirements. Despite this, feedback received indicated staff supported and promote people’s independence.

The provider listened to and understood people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff responded to people’s needs in the moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress. For example, people’s needs, communication preferences and diverse needs were assessed at the start of a respite stay; however, records did not demonstrate these assessments were routinely reviewed prior to each respite stay to confirm any changes in support needs or wishes. The provider gave assurances that this practice would be strengthened. On our return visit to complete the inspection, we found that people’s needs and risks had been reviewed, care plans updated where required, and relevant changes communicated to staff.

Overall, people experienced consistent and timely response from staff who understood how to support them safely and effectively in the moment. Staff demonstrated a good understanding of individuals’ needs and how to provide support during periods of change or increased anxiety, for example to reduce any discomfort, concern or anxiety. A staff member also described how the use of the sensory room had a positive impact for one person, helping to reduce anxiety during periods of heightened anxiety.

The provider cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff. Staff felt supported by each other. They were positive about the support they received from the provider and director and told us they were approachable.

Overall, staff reported feeling supported, respected and able to contribute to improving people’s quality of life. Staff received praised from the provider and director and told us they were treated fairly and supported. Comments included, “We have good staff, team work and support from management 24/7” and “There's no barriers; I feel safe and supported by management.”