Three Roses

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.

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 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.

People told us staff were kind and caring. Comments included, “Nothing is too much trouble; I like them all very much.”

Leaders carried out regular checks with people and their relatives, which assured them staff were delivering compassionate care.

Professionals provided positive feedback such as, “Feedback regularly indicates that service users are happy with the support they receive and speak positively about their carers. This suggests people are treated with kindness, dignity, and respect.”

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 and relatives told us staff treated them as individuals and met their specific needs. One person commented, “The carers know me. They always have a look to see if I need anything before they go, as I find it difficult to get around.”

Staff demonstrated a good understanding of individual people and their needs and were able to clearly describe how they treated people based on their individual needs.

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

People and relatives told us staff supported them to be as independent as possible. A person described how they could do certain things for themselves but how staff supported them when they were not able to do things independently.

Care plans clearly outlined what people were able to do for themselves and the importance of people remaining independent, so their skills and confidence were not impacted.

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.

The provider had escalated concerns to relevant professionals in relation to a person who was refusing personal care and based on feedback from the family and staff. Relatives told us the registered manager had acted and had been ‘fantastic and fully involved in trying to help’ but it was a very difficult situation for the family and for staff who needed to provide care. Another person commented, “The carers are all as good as gold, they'll do anything for me; a bit of shopping or cleaning, anything is not too much trouble for them.”

The provider did not always care about and promote the wellbeing of their staff.

Several staff told us they did not always receive regular breaks during their working day, which at times left them feeling tired. We saw some evidence of staff not always being scheduled for breaks through the documents we reviewed. Staff also said rotas were not always issued sufficiently in advance, making it difficult for them to plan activities and commitments outside of work. They felt this affected their work-life balance and overall wellbeing. Some staff also told us they did not always feel well supported when absent due to sickness and felt pressure to return to work before they had fully recovered.

The registered manager acknowledged these concerns and explained that sickness absence needed to be managed effectively to ensure continuity of care. They told us that where patterns and trends in staff absence had been identified, changes had been made to staffing arrangements and rotas. The registered manager also explained that the nature of domiciliary care meant rotas could change at short notice due to factors such as hospital admissions, cancelled visits or staff sickness. However, they had recently introduced a new rostering approach aimed at providing staff with at least two weeks' notice of their shifts wherever possible, except in emergency situations.

However, despite these concerns staff also shared positive experiences of working for the service. Staff described leaders as approachable and told us they felt able to speak openly about concerns. Positive comments included the provider being, “flexible with work times to fit in with caring responsibilities” and having “good teamwork.” Although staff described the role as busy, many told us they enjoyed working for the organisation and felt supported by their colleagues and leaders. Staff who were employed under sponsorship arrangements told us they had not experienced discrimination or unfair treatment.