Sister Kate Ltd

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

We looked for evidence that the service involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

This is the first inspection for this service since its registration with CQC. This key question has been rated as good.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The service always treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

Through our Give Feedback on Care service we received feedback form 3 people about their care and treatment. Comments demonstrated people’s confidence in the expertise of staff and described the service as ‘outstanding’ and said it was delivered with exceptional care and professionalism. People told us they would recommend the service to others.

Unverified online reviews obtained by the provider demonstrated a high level of people’s satisfaction with the service.

Staff followed policies to keep patient care and treatment confidential. Records identified people’s needs and the treatment they had received.

The service 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.

The service made adjustments for people with additional needs to ensure they could access the service. The service visited a local specialist college to treat people, so they could be seen in a familiar environment with their own support staff. The provider also visited people living in local care homes as required. Home visits were undertaken on request and were often people already known to the service.

Information could be provided in a form accessible to people. People could contact the service and book appointments by phone, text or online. Written information could be made available if requested.The provider told us that if a person did not speak English as a first language, they were contacted before their appointment and encouraged to attend their appointment with someone such as a family member or carer to act as an interpreter.

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

If people needed a chaperone, for personal or cultural reasons, they were asked to bring someone with them. However, a chaperone policy was not in place. Following our assessment, the provider shared the chaperone policy they had developed.

The service 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.

The provider managed their own appointment system and generally could accommodate people at short notice on the days when the clinic was open if required.

The provider was able to carry out home visits if required and provided a service for the young people living at a local specialist college. Portable equipment was available as well as appropriate personal protective equipment for carrying out the equipment.

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

Staff had the necessary resources and facilities for safe working, such as regular breaks and rest areas. Staff reported supporting each other when needed and time was taken for reflecting on practice.