CRM Healthcare Solutions 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.

Daily records were meaningful and respectful of the people receiving support. People and their relatives told us they were treated with kindness. One relative said, “The carers are very approachable, very amenable and really friendly and caring. They can empathise straight away with my relative’s needs.”

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 understood the needs of the people they supported, and staff demonstrated a good understanding of the people they supported. People were supported to attend social and religious events to enhance their quality of life. One relative told us, “They try to match carers with common interests with my relative to really enhance communication.”

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

People were offered choice wherever possible and staff respected decisions people made for themselves. Staff encouraged people to be independent wherever possible. One relative told us, “They encourage [person] to mobilise from the bedroom to the living room to promote their independence.”

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.

Care calls were punctual and lasted the full duration of the visit. If calls were ever late due to unforeseen issues, the person was informed and an explanation provided.

Staff’s knowledge of the people they supported ensured they could act quickly if there was any concerns. One relative told us, “They instantly know the changes of moods and know how to treat them”.

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.

The provide had introduced several initiatives to try and support staff well-being, such as: a dedicated staff break area, social events for staff and their families, complimentary car wash service and roadside support in the event of a vehicle breakdown. We also saw regular staff meetings. Following staff feedback and to encourage open and honest feedback from staff, mangers no longer attended meetings, instead minutes were shared for managers’ consideration in a separate meeting. We saw how staff feedback about a 6-day working week had been taken on board and the provider now had a 5-day working week. However, staff told us that they struggled with their rota’s being published just 2 days before the start of their working week and so were unable to effectively plan their life around work. They also told us they struggled with long working days with long unpaid breaks between the two shifts. Staff were not always paid to complete mandatory training where this was done online and from home and were not paid for travel time between care calls.