MSA Supported Living 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 requires improvement. This meant people were not always supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

This service scored 60 (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 did not always treat people with kindness, empathy and compassion, or respect their privacy and dignity. Staff did not always treat colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

Care was not consistently kind, compassionate and dignified during communication or when completing care records. Communication needs were not always fully understood or supportive in delivering person-centred care and care records were at times, written in a manner not reflective of compassion and dignity not reflective of compassion and dignity. The provider confirmed action would be taken to review staff practices and communication skills.

The provider did not always treat people as individuals to make sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. They did not always take account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.

There were not always robust systems in place to support people to be treated as individuals, Care documentation detailed people’s individual needs, likes and preferences. Identified goals were in place. However, people’s care was not consistently tailored to meet their needs, such as attending activities or promoting interests which were important to them, and daily notes did not always reflect an individualised approach about people in the service. The provider has put immediate actions into place to improve people’s relationships with the service, and ensure documentation reflects an individualised approach.

The provider did not always promote people’s independence, so people did not always know their rights or had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

Care planning documentation supported people to be provided with ways to improve their independence, choice and control., such as identified goals. There were positive risk-taking plans in place to support people to improve independence. However, care was not always tailored to individual needs. This meant independence was not consistently promoted and choices at times were limited. Staff did not always respect when people did not wish to be disturbed.

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 documentation evidenced people's immediate needs were met, for example, when involving relevant health services. Professionals we spoke with advised the service appropriately escalated them for support to meet people's immediate needs. One professional told us, "If they [the provider] had any health concerns they have dealt with this effectively by contacting GP or on a couple of occasions supported [person using the service] to attend Accident and Emergency to ensure issues were dealt with without delay." People we spoke with also agreed the provider appropriately involved relevant services to meet immediate need.

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

There were robust processes in place to support workforce wellbeing. There was a staff wellbeing policy in place and several initiatives offered to staff. Staff we spoke with told us their wellbeing was well supported by the service as they felt able to approach leaders with any concerns regarding their work, including any relevant adjustments to their work which may be required.