Share the Care Limited Office

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. The service was in breach of legal regulation in relation to dignity and respect. Some relatives told us staff were kind and caring. One relative told us, “She loves to recount her stories and staff appear to love it, they hear it anyway, I hear them in the mornings, I hear them giggling away.” However, other relatives fed back that their loved one was rushed due to a lack of time, which meant one person didn’t eat their breakfast. People were not always treated as individuals as they were not involved in discussions about their care and treatment.

This service scored 55 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

While some of the people we spoke to expressed that they were generally happy with their care, our assessment found care did not always meet the expected standards. The provider did not promote people’s independence, so people did not know their rights and have choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing. The provider told us they approached people’s next of kin, when they should have discussed the needs of people with them. For example, staff told us that a person has decided they wanted to remain in bed and not complete their physiotherapy. Despite the person having capacity, staff told us they asked the next of kin if it was ok for the person not to complete their physiotherapy. The registered manager told us that they had not approached anyone they support about consenting to care and treatment.

Despite this, relatives told us that day to day staff did try to encourage people to do things for themselves. One relative told us, “I can hear them ask “Can you put your shirt on, would you like help?”. They are trying to promote independence.”

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.

While some of the people we spoke to expressed that they were generally happy with their care, our assessment found care did not always meet the expected standards. The provider did not promote people’s independence, so people did not know their rights and have choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing. The provider told us they approached people’s next of kin, when they should have discussed the needs of people with them. For example, staff told us that a person has decided they wanted to remain in bed and not complete their physiotherapy. Despite the person having capacity, staff told us they asked the next of kin if it was ok for the person not to complete their physiotherapy. The registered manager told us that they had not approached anyone they support about consenting to care and treatment.

Despite this, relatives told us that day to day staff did try to encourage people to do things for themselves. One relative told us, “I can hear them ask “Can you put your shirt on, would you like help?”. They are trying to promote independence.”

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.

We did not look at Workforce wellbeing and enablement during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.