Archived: Achievers Care Solutions Limited

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 was the provider's first inspection at their new location. At our last inspection we rated this key question good. At this assessment, the rating has changed to requires improvement.

This meant people did not always feel well-supported, cared for or treated with dignity and respect. The service was not meeting the principles of RSRCRC as the model of care did not maximise people's choice, control and independence and the care was not person-centred.

This service scored 55 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Relatives of people using the service were complimentary of the care. One relative said, “The care is ok. It’s good. Nine out of ten.” Another relative said, “They are caring and gentle.”

The registered manager spoke passionately about working in the sector and told us she cared about the people using the service and their relatives. She had set up a monthly gathering for families to attend and to receive support and we saw photos of this event with people and their families socialising.

People’s care plans lacked detail and did not always take account of their strengths and abilities or fully consider their personal, cultural and social needs. People’s emotional support needs were not always documented. This meant staff did not always have detailed guidance about how to tailor their support to meet people’s specific needs.

The provider did not always promote people’s independence, choice and control over their own care and support. People’s care records had not been updated when people’s needs changed and this meant they did not accurately reflect what people were able to manage independently and when they required support.

Staff responded promptly to people’s needs to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress. People’s relatives told us staff were quick to act in an emergency, although this was not always documented clearly in care plans.

We received positive feedback from staff about working for the service. They told us they were well supported by the registered manager and could reach out to her at any time.

However, staff did not have access to regular supervision, training or appraisal. This meant the provider had no way of ensuring staff had the skills, knowledge and experience to meet the needs and promote the safety and wellbeing of the people they supported.