Premier Care (Midlands) Limited - Coventry

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

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 75 (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 consistently described staff as caring, supportive and attentive. They said staff knew them well, listened to them and often went beyond what was expected to support their wellbeing. One person told us, “They are very caring, we only have to ask, they are willing to do anything.” Another highlighted the empathy shown by staff, who remembered the anniversary of their husband's death and provided emotional support. People also valued the time staff spent talking with them and helping them manage their day-to-day challenges.

Staff knew people well and adapted care to support their independence, dignity and emotional well-being. One person told us, “If I am in pain they give me ice packs, support me with pillows, make sure I have my pain relief gel. When they wash me, they keep me covered with a towel, let me wash my private parts”.

The registered manager told us they aimed to ensure dignity, respect and compassion were consistently upheld through regular check ins and feedback with people and their relatives. Systems were in place to ensure any concerns raised were acted on immediately and lessons learnt. We saw evidence of these checks documented and stored in files.

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 told us staff understood their individual needs and recognised changes in their wellbeing. Relatives said staff could identify signs of distress through people's body language and responded appropriately. One person commented, “They are respectful, ask me how I want to be addressed,” while another explained staff adapted their support when medication made them feel tired.

Staff we spoke to understood the importance of respecting people’s individual needs and preferences. One staff member told us, “I make sure the person is given care tailored to their needs”. Another staff said, “I respect people's cultural and religious needs, their choices and preferences".

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

People told us they had choice and control regarding the delivery of their care and were supported with making decisions on what they wanted to eat and wear. They confirmed they were in regular communication with management and office staff. Care calls were flexible and altered to accommodate changing needs. The provider’s care system had a feature which allowed people and relatives access to their daily care notes. This provided further assurances that care was delivered in line with people’s needs. One relative told us, “They know me and do their best to accommodate our needs. The App helps, they are doing a good job, the Manager will respond directly to me”. People were supported to maintain their independence by staff who encouraged them to complete tasks for themselves. Staff told us, “I encourage them, I know they can do some things on their own. I will ask them to wash themselves. Assist them with clothes. I know if a person can eat on their own, don’t rush them and stay with them. Try as much as possible to promote their independence”.

Where people had specific communication needs, this was clearly documented on the care plan. Staff gave us examples of different types of communication methods they used when communicating with people.

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.

People were supported by staff who responded to their needs in a timely manner. Staff were encouraged by management to be alert during calls to any potential changes in peoples wellbeing and to report it to family members and the office. Relatives gave examples where staff had identified their loved one was unwell. One relative told us, “[Name] was unwell 2 weeks ago, the carer dealt with him very well, she contacted me, kept me informed”.

Records showed people’s care calls were routinely on time. A relative told us, “[Name] receives regular carers, no calls are missed”. However, there were some inconsistencies with people not always having the same carers deliver their care. The registered manager told us they were working towards a more consistent approach for people to receive a regular team of carers.

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

Staff were positive about their working environment, they felt valued, listened to and supported. The management team were approachable, responsive and wellbeing was prioritised. We saw examples of support provided to staff following incidents. The provider employed a dedicated staff member, their role was to provide staff with mentoring, training and development. In addition, they provided practical and emotional support to new and existing staff, complementing the support provided by management while remaining independent of management structures. Staff comments included, “[Name] is brilliant, they will always support”. “[Name] is the best one, always listens to me. He is a good supervisor and guider".