Elite Care 24/7

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 65 (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 consistently treated people with kindness, compassion and respect, promoting their dignity and wellbeing.

Relatives spoke positively about the caring approach of staff, describing them as "really great" and "lovely".

Staff knew people well and provided personalised support which reflected their preferences and interests. One relative told us staff supported them as well as their family member, for example making them a cup of tea when they were tired, demonstrating empathy and compassion. Another relative described how staff sang and danced with their family member, promoting happiness and meaningful engagement.

A member of staff told us, "We treat our people like family and care for them how we would want our family to be cared for." Staff’s comments to us about the approach they took to their work and the people they supported reflected a culture of kindness, compassion and respect.

The provider also ensured people's privacy and dignity were always respected.

The provider did not always demonstrate a person-centred approach to planning and delivering care.

Whilst staff were generally familiar with people's individual needs and preferences, this information was not consistently reflected within care records.

Care plans lacked sufficient detail to ensure care and support were tailored to people's individual needs, preferences and circumstances.

Although the registered manager recognised the importance of continuity and positive relationships, the absence of comprehensive person-centred information within care records meant we could not always be assured people received care that fully reflected their wishes and needs.

We found occasions where opportunities to seek advice or intervention from relevant healthcare professionals had been missed. This meant people may have experienced avoidable anxiety or distress and may not have received timely support to help manage identified risks and changing needs.

The provider had identified the need to improve the quality of care planning and intended to incorporate more detailed person-centred information within a new electronic care planning system. However, at the time of our inspection, these improvements had not yet been embedded into practice.
 

The provider took steps to promote people's independence and support them to make choices about their day-to-day lives.

Staff knew people well and where required used communication aids to help people express their wishes and preferences. Relatives and staff described how support was adapted to meet individual communication needs and personal routines, enabling people to participate in decisions about their care.

A relative told us “They [staff] know [person] well and when they are upset how to get them to tell them what they want. Sometimes they use pictures.”
One staff member said, “I know that [person] is better in a morning and so we do more things at this time.”

People were involved in discussions about their support and were encouraged to provide feedback, helping them maintain control over how care was delivered. However, shortfalls in consent and capacity assessments meant the provider could not always demonstrate that people's rights to choice and control were being upheld within the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act.

As a result, although there was evidence of person-centred support and involvement in decision-making, the provider's systems did not consistently ensure people's legal rights were protected.
 

The provider demonstrated a responsive approach to meeting people's immediate needs.

Staff listened to and understood people's wishes and responded promptly to concerns, distress and changes in health.

People and relatives gave positive examples of staff acting quickly when urgent support was required. One person described how staff remained with them when they became seriously unwell and arranged emergency medical assistance. They said “I was really poorly and I live alone. The staff stayed with me and called me an ambulance. They are so kind.” this demonstrated staff provided reassurance and practical support at a time of need.

Staff told us they were able to stay longer when people required additional support and would communicate this to the office to ensure care remained person-centred and responsive.
Records showed staff escalated concerns appropriately by contacting family members and relevant healthcare professionals.

Although some care plans could have contained more detailed information about people's health conditions, this did not appear to impact the provider's ability to respond promptly and effectively to people's immediate needs.
Overall, people received timely support when their needs changed or urgent situations arose.
 

The provider cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff. They supported and enabled staff to deliver person-centred care.
Staff told us they felt well supported by the registered manager and team.

They had been encouraged to improve their skills by completing nationally recognised qualifications. A staff member told us, “This is my first job in care. [Name] supported me to learn the role and to improve my writing. They make sure we supported and safe at work.” Another staff member told us, “I came here because my friend told me how good they are. They let me work hours around my family. I am proud to say I have chosen to work here.”

Staff confirmed they received regular supervision sessions and spot checks from the management team. This enabled them to reflect on their practice, receive constructive feedback and identify any additional support or training needed to perform their roles effectively.

The provider held a sponsorship licence for staff and had created information guides and local cultural awareness training for staff to support them when moving to the UK.

Staff told us they would recommend the service as a good place to work.