Riseup Healthcare 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. At our last assessment, we rated this key question good. At this assessment, the rating has remained. 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.

Staff always treated people who used the service with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. We received consistently positive feedback from people, and their relatives, in relation to how the service treated people respectfully and as individuals in control of the care and support they received. People told us they felt listened to and valued as individuals. One person told us that, “The staff listen to me and consider my point of view”. A relative told us, “Staff follow the procedures I have put in place, and they [person] are very happy. Care plans were person-centred and included the holistic needs of people. The provider focused on people’s strengths, and people’s milestones were celebrated. A service user guide was also provided to people at the commencement of service, so they knew what to expect from the service and staff in relation to the individualised care being offered. We did find some inconsistencies within the service user guide, which the provider immediately addressed.

The provider treated people as individuals and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. They considered of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture, and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics. People told us that they were encouraged by staff to make decisions, and staff always asked for their consent to care. Staff were able to give us examples of how they supported people to remain independent and in control of the care and support they received. They described how they supported people with choices and empowerment. One staff member told us, “I know the wishes of each of the people and like to see them happy.” People were provided with a service user guide at the commencement of the service, which gave them information in relation to how their independence would be supported and how they would remain in control of the care they received. We saw that care plans considered and supported people’s independence and were completed in a manner that put people in control of the care service they received.

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 that staff encouraged them to remain independent and to stay in control of the support they were receiving. We saw examples where the provider has supported people to improve their mobility. One person was now able to move around their home with a walking frame and access their garden with support from staff. Another person had been supported to be able to manage her food and drinks, leading to a reduction in the number of daily calls. One staff member told us, “I involve clients in decisions, offer choices, and support them to do as much as possible independently.”

The service emphasised promoting independence and choice for the people supported. Care plans highlighted people’s abilities and what they could do for themselves. Frequent reviews meant that staff had the relevant information to support people effectively.

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. We heard of instances where extra support had been provided in times of emergencies, and the impact on people and their relatives. A person told us that, “the staff are great, and can’t do enough for you.” Staff told us that they were always committed to providing high-quality service to keep people safe. The registered manager told us that where there was an emergency and staff could not fulfil an allocated call, they would ensure there was an immediate replacement and the person and their relative would be informed who would be completing the call.

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 provider did not always treat staff with kindness and respect. Staff told us that there was good communication with the registered manager, and they felt valued. However, staff told us that sometimes the provider did not show empathy for sickness. One staff member told us, “I have felt uncomfortable with regards to calling in sick as we either get the phone put down on us or we get spoken to like a bit of dirt.” We spoke to the provider about this, and they were committed to making improvements.

Other staff told us that the provider always supported them. One person told us, “The culture is caring, supportive, and team-focused, and I feel valued.” We were told that the management team is always available and contactable at any time of day. There was however concern from some staff who felt there needed to be improvement around how the provider spoke to staff about sickness absence, as this led to a blame culture. There were processes in place to support staff, their well-being, and their personal and professional development. For example, staff received regular supervisions and yearly appraisals, and they were encouraged to complete qualifications that the service paid for.