Leicester City Council Shared Lives Service

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

This means we looked for evidence that the provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect. At our last rated inspection we rated this key question Good. At this inspection the rating has remained Good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect.

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 treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity.

People were supported by Shared Lives carers who treated them with kindness and respect. During our inspection, we observed positive interactions between people and Shared Lives carers. Shared Lives carers demonstrated an understanding of people's individual communication needs and adjusted their approach to help people express their views. People appeared relaxed in the presence of their Shared Lives carers and were able to make choices about aspects of their daily lives.

Shared Lives carers were able to describe people's likes, dislikes and routines and spoke about them in a respectful manner and there was evidence that Shared Lives carers sought to maintain people's dignity and privacy.

Feedback from people and relatives was generally positive and indicated people felt cared for and supported by Shared Lives carers who knew them well. These observations demonstrated people were treated with compassion and respect, and their individuality was recognised in the support they received.

We did not look at Treating people as individuals during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

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

People were supported to make day-to-day decisions about their lives and support, and Shared Lives carers generally knew people well and understood their preferences, routines and what was important to them. We saw examples of people being encouraged to make choices about activities, relationships and how they spent their time. For example, 1 person was supported to access a local café where they could meet and socialise with people who shared their cultural heritage and experiences. This had helped the person develop meaningful community connections, strengthen their sense of identity and belonging, and promote their social wellbeing.

Additionally people were supported to have annual holidays both with their Shared Lives carer’s family or something specific to their interests and preferences. 1 Shared Lives carer told us, “we have a family holiday once a year which we always include [person]. They also love Skegness, so each year, on my own, I take [person] on a trip to the seaside to do the things they most enjoy”

We did not look at Responding to people’s immediate needs during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

The Shared Lives scheme policy for monitoring visits include a home visit every 3 months. A Shared Lives officer is to visit the home of the Shared Lives carer and person drawing on support. This helped to strengthen relationships and increase opportunities to identify concerns.

However, there were limited opportunities for Shared Lives carers and staff to come together to share learning, discuss challenges, reflect on practice and develop peer support networks. This reduced opportunities to promote consistency, reinforce key messages and foster a strong sense of belonging within the scheme.

Shared Lives carers described their roles as rewarding but largely independent, and the provider had not sufficiently developed forums, events or structured engagement mechanisms to ensure Shared Lives carers felt connected to the wider service. Leaders were therefore unable to demonstrate how learning, feedback and best practice were routinely shared across the workforce to support continuous improvement.