You are here

Archived: Workwise Healthcare Limited

This service is now registered at a different address - see new profile

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 2 August 2012
Date of Publication: 9 August 2012
Inspection Report published 9 August 2012 PDF

People should be treated with respect, involved in discussions about their care and treatment and able to influence how the service is run (outcome 1)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Understand the care, treatment and support choices available to them.
  • Can express their views, so far as they are able to do so, and are involved in making decisions about their care, treatment and support.
  • Have their privacy, dignity and independence respected.
  • Have their views and experiences taken into account in the way the service is provided and delivered.

How this check was done

Our judgement

The provider is compliant with this standard. People had been supported and encouraged to make decisions about their daily lives and had been provided with opportunities to influence the care they received.

User experience

We spoke with three people who were using the agency. They told us they were provided with information about the agency in the form of a service user guide which they found useful and informative.

People told us that they felt the care staff respected their opinions and decisions and would always promote their privacy and dignity when providing personal care. Comments included, “I am highly satisfied with the agency, all the staff are very respectful and pleasant which is reassuring.”

People also told us that they had been involved in their care planning process and confirmed that a copy of their care plans and risk assessments were left in their homes so they could access them at any time.

Other evidence

We looked at the agency's service user guide, which was supplied to all new service users. It contained detailed information regarding the services provided by the agency together with a statement of purpose and the agency's complaints procedure. The guide also showed how the agency had considered people’s rights and equality and diversity.

We also saw that the agency's customer care training package, which was provided to all the care staff within their induction to the agency, contained details on the importance of respecting people’s religious and cultural needs, thus promoting people's dignity and respect.

We looked at the care plans of three people who used the agency. We found they contained information about people’s preferences, likes and dislikes. They also included instructions for staff to follow to ensure people’s rights, privacy and dignity were considered and respected at all times. This showed that the agency had taken the necessary steps to ensure people would receive the care and support package in a respectful and dignified manner.

The staff who were spoken with told us that senior carers/key workers were responsible for reviewing people’s needs on a regular basis and, as part of the review process, people's views and expectations would be updated. This showed that the agency had taken the necessary steps to ensure that people could express their views and were involved in making decisions about their care on an ongoing basis.

All the staff employed at the agency had been provided with the opportunity to undergo training as "Dignity Champions". This was a government initiative which aims to put dignity at the heart of care. The role of dignity champions was to stand up and challenge disrespectful behaviour. They act as good role models for their colleagues by highlighting how staff could promote people's respect and dignity within the care home setting. This further showed that the provider was proactive in ensuring that all staff would promote people's respect and dignity.