Orbital 4 Support 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.

At our last assessment 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.

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 treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion, and staff respected their privacy and dignity. During our observations, staff engaged with people using enthusiasm, humour and warmth, which supported positive and trusting relationships. People responded well to these interactions. Physical contact was appropriate and occurred only when initiated by the person receiving support. Feedback from people and relatives was consistently positive. One relative told us, “I think the care staff are good – everything is ok”.

The provider did not always treat people as individuals or ensure that their care, support, and treatment reflected their personal needs and preferences.

People’s care plans included some information about daily living activities and interests, but they lacked sufficient person‑centred detail and did not present a holistic picture of each person. Staff were aware of people’s daily routines, but the care plans did not capture what mattered to individuals, their strengths and abilities, or their personal aspirations. This lack of clear documentation would mean that professionals and new staff would not have the information necessary to fully acknowledge people’s individualities.

The provider did not always promote people’s independence, meaning people did not consistently know their rights or have choice and control over their care, treatment and wellbeing. We received some positive feedback from relatives about how people were supported to make choices in their daily care. One relative told us, “As a house they discuss the menu and do have choice. (Name) also has choice of activity and is not made to go anywhere.” However, people’s daily care records lacked sufficient detail, so it was not always clear how staff were offering choice or supporting people’s decision‑making and independence.Whilst we observed staff encouraging people to make choices these choices were limited to established activities with no scope offered for new opportunities.

The provider told us they listened to and understood people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff responded to people’s immediate needs and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress. During the inspection, we observed multiple examples of staff responding promptly to people’s requests, such as facilitating activities or providing food and drink. However, responses to risk and wider concerns about people’s health were not always fully considered. When immediate risks were identified, the provider did not respond in a timely or proactive manner and relied on the actions of others rather than taking the necessary steps independently to keep people safe. This had meant a person was exposed to risk that was only mitigated once it was raised during the inspection.

The provider promoted staff wellbeing and demonstrated care for their workforce. Staff told us they felt supported by the registered manager and described a culture of openness and transparency. Reasonable adjustments were made where needed to help staff carry out their roles, for example using technology to enable staff to record daily care notes orally.

Although staff and the registered manager described positive working relationships and regular supportive communication, these interactions were not being formally recorded or evidenced. The provider had identified this gap and was in the process of introducing a formal system to document staff support and supervision going forward.