Merline Healthcare 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

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 newly registered service. This key question has been rated 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.

Relatives consistently gave positive feedback about the caring approach of staff and told us that staff were responsive and attentive to people’s needs. One relative described feeling reassured by how staff supported their family member. Another relative commented, “Without the carers and their smiley faces and chatter it would be a dull day and they deliver such wonderful care.”

Staff demonstrated an understanding of people’s emotional needs and worked to build trust, particularly with people who had experienced previous distress.

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.

The provider always treated people as individuals and took account of their personal preferences, needs and circumstances. Assessments and care planning reflected people’s individual needs, including communication preferences, staff gender preferences for care, and involvement of family members where appropriate.

Staff described how they adapted their approach for people with complex needs, including those receiving end of life care or living with mental health needs.

Relatives told us staff understood their family member well and provided care that was tailored to them. A relative told us, “[Person] loves [their] carers and they are so happy, every day they are rays of sunshine and [person] lights up when they visit.”

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

The provider supported people to have choice and control over their care and respected people’s decisions. People were encouraged to make day‑to‑day choices about their care. Where people required support with communication, staff used alternative methods, such as communication aids. They involved people in discussions in ways that met their needs. This helped people remain in control of decisions about their care and how support was delivered.

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.

Relatives told us staff responded appropriately when people’s needs changed and provided reassurance during difficult times. A relative told us, “We had only just joined the company and my [relative] had chest pains and straight away the carers went into emergency mode, called 999 and stayed with [them] in the ambulance.”

Care records showed that staff contacted relevant professionals when required. Although we found some gaps in documentation, these did not impact on people receiving timely care and relatives told us they had no concerns about responsiveness.

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.

Staff told us they could access management support and supervision, and said managers were approachable. However, we identified concerns with how rotas were managed, including staff working consecutive shifts without adequate breaks and no travel time being allocated. These arrangements placed pressure on staff wellbeing and increased the risk of fatigue.

While training and supervision systems were in place, they were not always sufficient to ensure staff were consistently supported in their roles. The provider had not always used information about staffing pressures and late calls to improve systems and support staff wellbeing.