Zara Healthcare

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence.

This was our first assessment of Zara health care, and we rated this key question good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

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 made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, well-being and communication needs with them.

People had an assessment of need and in regard to the person receiving supported living, assessments were holistic considering their social needs, health needs and educational needs.This took into account other professionals’ views and involvement. Once in situ care plans were reviewed in an ongoing way and any change in need were discussed with staff and relevant professionals. Annual reviews were held unless there were significant changes in which case reviews were more frequent. A staff member told us, "When supporting a new client, care plans and risk assessments are implemented to ensure safe, effective, and person-centred care.” They also said should there be an accident the circumstances would be recorded and reviewed to ensure any risks were clearly identified, removed and reflected in the plan of care.

A person using the service told us, “The manager or the team leader come here, either when they’re doing a spot check of staff, to do the care themselves, or for a reassessment. They ask how things are and I can add things into the care visit, change the plan, if time allows.”

The provider planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. They did this in line with legislation and current evidence-based good practice and standards.

Outcomes were clearly defined as part of the assessment determining what was important to the person and what they would like from the service. Social support was incorporated into the assessment and recognised people’s diverse needs. In regard to the person receiving supported living staff supported them to access their continued education and ongoing health care, as well as providing social support and engagement. There was a good description in the care plan as to what was important to them to help staff deliver informed care.

Staff were kept up to date with good professional practice and staff training and development was robust. Staff explained they completed induction, skills for care induction, both face to face and online training and told us about the practical application of their training. Staff received regular supervision and appraisal. Spot checks enabled management staff to check staff competencies in the workplace and check in with people using the service about how the staff member was doing. People told us they were aware of spot checks, and these happened regularly.

The provider always worked well across teams and services to support people. They shared thorough assessments of people’s needs when they moved between different services, so people only needed to tell their story once.

Feedback about teamwork was positive from people using the service, One told us,” They’re regular staff, I know all their names and importantly they know what my needs are – they understand. They’will call the Dr or the nurse for me, if necessary.” Another said, “I’ve got regular staff, I’ve got to know all of them. They know me really well and what I can and can’t do, I don’t have to keep explaining it.”

The team had a good mix of experience with clearly clarified roles and a good working relationship with other professionals who told us joint working with this agency was seamless. Clear documentation and communication made it possible for this service to exceed people’s expectations.

One staff member working on an ad hoc basis to support the manager with assessments and care planning had both a nursing and social work background and was able to describe how this supported them to develop holistic assessments and work in collaboration with other professionals having established good networks of support. Professionals told us this agency went, “above and beyond” and would success in taking on more difficult care packages due to their knowledge, experience and can-do attitude. They also said they would source training to equip their staff and accessed training from the local authority, the local hospital and more bespoke training when required.

Whilst staff often worked remotely there were clear lines of support and staff said they felt connected to the wider members of the team. For example, one staff member said: “my manager and team leader provide valuable guidance, feedback, and reassurance, helping me maintain high standards of care and address any issues promptly.” Another said “Yes, there is very good teamwork within our team. We support each other throughout the day, starting with daily huddles where we share handovers and discuss any important updates. This helps everyone stay informed and ensures continuity of care.” The manager told us of events both formal and informal to support with staff integration when they were entering the country to staff social events and recognition schemes where staff had demonstrated ex practice and were awarded with vouchers. The service used a combination of daily handovers, app notifications, and direct communication with staff and people using the service to ensure all felt appropriately supported. We found the manager and team leader present at the inspection were powerful communicators and advocates demonstrating a good knowledge of people and staff and having an awareness of any issues within the team such as unhelpful banter between different staff members. Where issues were identified they were quickly addressed.

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

Multinational staff were employed with a vast array of experience in health and social care and transferable skills. Whilst most staff had entered the county some years ago, they were initially supported with housing, benefits and developing relationships within their communities. Staff told us how they were welcomed and completed training prior to delivering care, whilst waiting for checks to be in place to validate their suitability for employment. Staff told us they had regular contact and support and felt valued within the team. They received role specific training but could also complete training in line with their specific interests and people’s needs. They had regular catch ups, team meetings, annual appraisals, spot checks, observations of practice and supervision which all helped to support and develop staff. Recruitment was robust and induction helped to support and develop staff. Additional train the trainer roles were being considered to help ensure staff received timely training and the service worked with other professionals to identify and deliver training.

The provider routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured that outcomes were positive and consistent, and that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves.

Robust monitoring of people’s care needs helped to identify strengths in the service but also areas for staff development and improvement. Actions plans were implemented based on audits, spot checks and feedback from staff, those who used the service and relatives. We saw clear examples of actions taken in relation to our feedback and feedback from the local authority.

Lessons learnt were clearly embedded in the auditing process. When mistakes were made these were reviewed in a supportive way and considered staff’s training and support needs.Staff had regular opportunity to discuss their workload and how they were feeling, as well as looking at training and self-development needs.

Care plans were well written, and staff were clear about their job role and company expectations. The person receiving supported living had a detailed, personalised plan giving staff clear guidance on how to support the person in different situations.

Their documentation supported safe care by clearly outlining risks and how to manage them,and how to support the person respectfully and recognise their progress. Care was responsive and staff adapted their communication and support strategies to meet the person’s needs. The focus on helping the person develop coping strategies also supported effective care.The documents suggested a thoughtful and personalised approach to supporting the individual.

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. We saw evidence that initial assessments were carried out before the commencement of service delivery.

Throughout the inspection we saw clear examples of how people’s choices in care were promoted and how staff delivered care in line with people’s needs. If staff were not able to obtain valid consent, they knew what actions to take to escalate concerns if needed for the safety of the person concerned. For example, one person said, "They wouldn’t do anything without asking me, they’re very good like that.” Another said, “They speak to (Family member), they explain what they’re doing and always get her consent. Sometimes they speak quickly and have to repeat it.” The person receiving supported living had staff familiar with their needs and communication style. Their communication needs were documented and consent to care and treatment received. In terms of their care plans we found there were small areas where the documentation could be strengthened, such as showing clearer evidence of the person being involved in goal setting, overall.

Staff told us they completed training that included The Mental Capacity Act 2005 and codes of practice. They all demonstrated a good understanding of person-centred care which underpinned people’s human rights and the Equality Act 2010. Staff told us how they promoted choice and independence by building up respectful, supportive relationships. Families were consulted in line with the persons wishes.