Social Care Solutions (Raunds)

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 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.

We received mixed feedback from a relative about the service. A relative expressed that the level of care their relative received was dependent upon the member of staff providing the support.

A person we were observing could not directly tell us about their experience. We used our short observational framework for assessment (SOFI) to observe the person’s experience of the care they received.

We observed positive interactions between staff and the person they were supporting. The staff we observed were kind, caring, compassionate and passionate about providing a good service. A staff member told us, "We make people happy. Going home knowing that I have made a difference" made them feel proud.

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.

We received mixed feedback from a relative about people’s individual needs being met by the service. However, we found that care plans included some information about life experiences, preferences and how people wished to be cared for. Staff knew people well, including their hobbies, routines and personal choices. We observed staff being patient, kind and communicating in a respectful way, which helped people feel valued and understood.

Staff demonstrated they understood people’s needs and supported them in ways that treated them as an individual.

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

A person’s care plan provided some detail about what they could do for themselves and where they required support from staff. Staff promoted independence, choice and control and this was confirmed by a relative who told us, “[service user] chooses when to go to bed and when to get up.

The staff made sure they involved the person as much as possible in domestic tasks but sometimes it would be a split task. For example, a staff member told us, “When making the bed, half might be made by staff and half by the person.” A professional commenting on the support a person received from staff told us, “I would also say they’re good with thinking a bit differently to try and support [person].”

A visual jobs and activities board had been developed to help structure domestic tasks during the week and get the person fully involved in maintaining their home. For example, tasks included cleaning, cooking and shopping.

A person had a mobility car and staff who could drive supported them to go out in the car to take part in activities or events. Staff told us the person would also use the bus if staff were not able to drive.

We found a person took part in a range of activities that they chose and enjoyed.

A team leader told us they tried to involve people in recruiting new staff for the service, however, not all people were confident in taking part, so people had helped develop some specific questions that are asked in the interviews. This meant people had some choice about the staff recruited to work at the service.

The provider did not always listen to and understand people’s needs, views and wishes. Staffdid not always respond to people’s needs in the moment or act to minimise any discomfort,concern or distress.

It was evident during our assessment that staff knew the people they were supporting well, and we observed they were able to anticipate their needs because of this. Care plans provided some information to staff to anticipate and meet people’s needs quickly.

We observed staff to be attentive to people’s needs. However, the provider had not taken steps to ensure a person’s positive behaviour support (PBS) was effective and we found staff were working from a PBS plan and a behaviors that challenge support plan. These records had not been triangulated, and we were provided with no evidence of a functional assessment or involvement of a PBS practitioner (internal or external) to ensure people’s anxieties or distress were being appropriately managed. However, the interim manager told us they would liaise with the internal PBS team to ensure the plan met the person’s identified needs.

The provider cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centred care.

There was evidence and staff confirmed regular supervisions and appraisals were taking place, and we found staff completed a health declaration before commencing in their role. A staff member told us, “They [Management team] care about us as employees.”

We found that workplace adjustments had been made by the provider to support staff well-being. For example, a staff member told us adjustments had been made to their working hours to support them back to work after a period of absence.

Staff told us there was an employee assistance service they were able to access and that they had access to some benefits through the provider.

A staff engagement survey was completed in July and August and the interim manager told us this would be followed by an analysis of the results, and a “you said, we did” exercise for the findings. The interim manager was aware there were some areas for improvement and told us they planned to repeat the survey in January 2026 to monitor for improvement.