Premier Homecare

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

This means we looked for evidence that the provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity, and respect.At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment, the rating has remained good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

This service scored 65 (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.

All the people we spoke with told us they felt their needs were met and staff were kind and caring. One person told us “They are just ever so lovely” and another person told us, “For sure I feel safe with my carers.” Through our discussions with staff members, we found there was a shared ethos of kindness and compassion amongst the care team. Staff members were supportive of each other and told us how they wanted the best outcomes for people they supported. One staff member told us how a person could not access their garden due to it being overgrown and that it would be helpful for their colleagues to be able to hang the person’s washing on the line, so they cut back overgrowth and supported the person to have access to their garden again.

The provider treated people as individuals and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. They took account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.

People’s life histories, preferences, interests, and aspirations were known well by staff who support them but were not always consistently recorded in peoples care plans. During our feedback, the branch manager acknowledged that care plans were actively being reviewed and including more person-centred information with the move over to their new electronic system. We saw evidence of this when reviewing care plans that had already been transitioned over.

A staff told us that they know people well but felt the care plans needed improvement. Staff also acknowledged that the move to a new system will make these improvements more achievable.

The provider promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment, and wellbeing.

Staff understood the importance of helping people to maintain their independence and knew people. People told us that their choice is always respected, they are listened to and are in control of their care. One person told us, “[staff] are very respectful when dealing with my personal care and ask my permission before doing a task.”

Care plans lacked person-centred detail that would actively compliment the service promoting people’s independence and reflect their choices. As mentioned previously in this report, care plans are being improved as they are being transferred onto the new electronic system.

Staff responded to people’s needs in the moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern, or distress.

People told us that in the past it had proven difficult to reach the office management team but since the new branch manager commenced their role at the service, this has improved. One person told us “We are happy with them; they have improved over the last year.”

We did not find evidence that care plans had been reviewed consistently. As mentioned previously in this report, this put people at risk of their immediate needs not being reflected within the care records for care staff or other professionals to view. However, care plans are being improved as they are being transferred onto the new electronic system and we have seen evidence of these improvements where care plans have been reviewed, updated, and transferred to their new electronic system. The branch manager also told us processes that the new manager had introduced for ensuring that all care records are consistently reviewed and updated as per best practise and guidance.

The provider did not always care about and promote the wellbeing of their staff. They did not always support or enable staff to deliver person-centred care.

The branch manager explained that when revising the rotas for the staff that they looked to ensure a work life balance, for example, considering staff personal circumstances and days they preferred to work. The branch manager explained they had an open-door policy. The branch manager also told us of nominating staff for awards that the provider will be holding as a wider organisation. The branch manager showed us evidence of starting to participate in wider recruitment and community engagement.

The provider had a lone working policy in place, and this was also covered in their induction for new staff. There has been a change to the office team and a new branch manager. We received mixed feedback from staff about how they are valued and supported by the provider but staff acknowledged they had experienced improvements since the new branch manager commenced their role. For example staff told us “ We get praise from the office / managers but there seems no enthusiasm for our efforts higher up in the organisation.”