Choices Care Ltd (Birmingham)

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 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 and their loved ones spoke positively regarding the caring nature of staff who supported them and/or their loved ones. One relative told us, “They [care staff] are respectful and chat to [person] whilst they are supporting them. They are so sweet with [person] there isn’t a single one of them who isn’t and they have the patience of a saint.”

Another relative described the positive impact the service had on their loved one, in that they were able to ensure the care staff supporting them were Bengali speaking. They described how low in mood their loved one was, prior to being supported by the care staff. They told us, “It has made such a difference to [person], they are always happy and chatting to them. They are like family.” They went on to describe the personal interest the staff took in their loved one’s interests.

From the feedback received, it was clear people had positive, supportive and caring relationships with the staff who supported them. This was highlighted in the number of letters received by the service from service users and their families.

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 reported staff treated them as individuals. Care records provided staff with information regarding what was important to people and how they wished to be supported. People’s personal, cultural, social and religious needs were recorded and noted in their care records.

It was clear from our conversations with people and their loved ones that people were treated as individuals by staff. One person told us, “I’m really happy with them [care staff] and have no problems at all. They are always respectful – I was given the option of changing to another agency – why would you want to change something that is working well?”

Staff spoke with warmth and affection for the people they supported. They were knowledgeable when it came to people and what was important to them. A member of staff told us, “We are seeing the same people and building relationships and it’s much better for the client as well.”

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 were supported to exercise choice and control regarding the delivery of their care. Where calls needed to be altered to meet changing needs, efforts were made to accommodate those requests. People and their loved ones confirmed they were in regular touch not only with care staff but members of the management team as well. Staff recognised the importance of the support networks that were in place for people and made every effort to build relationships and engage with those networks.

Where people had specific communication needs, for example where English was not their first language, these were assessed prior to the commencement of care to ensure they were supported by staff who could communicate effectively in their preferred language and engage meaningfully with them.

People were supported by staff who understood their social, cultural and religious needs and treated people as individuals, considering any relevant protected equality characteristics.

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. Records showed people’s calls were routinely on time and people were supported by a consistent group of staff who knew them well. Staff were mindful to be alert during calls to any potential changes in people’s wellbeing and to report back to family members and loved ones. For example, staff were encouraged by management, in winter months, to be extra mindful of people’s wellbeing and be aware of the additional risks to them.

Relatives provided examples where staff had identified their loved one was unwell and had contacted them immediately. We saw examples where this additional support resulted in medical attention being accessed in a timely manner.

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

Staff reported they felt supported by the management team and the provider. They described them as approachable and felt listened to. Staff were able to provide examples of additional support provided to them for a variety of personal reasons. They were also encouraged to provide feedback and develop their own skills and learning.

Staff achievements were recognised and rewarded. For those staff for whom English was not their first language, additional support was provided in the form of a booklet, ‘A practical guide for living and working in the UK’.

The provider had introduced a number of internal awards for staff. They told us, “You have to care for your staff as well; they need to be happy as well.”