Opportunities for Adults and Children

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.

Relatives were positive about staff. Comments included, “Staff sit and talk to her, they take their time”, “They are all excellent. Very good” and “They talk to her as a person, not a child.”

The service carried out spot checks on staff in people’s homes to ensure staff were treating people with compassion and dignity. This included reviewing staff training and observations of how staff treated people during care calls.

People’s care plans promoted person‑centred care and helped staff prioritise both essential care tasks and people’s wellbeing. Care calls were scheduled to ensure staff had enough time to provide support without rushing and to spend time talking with people. This meant staff could build trusting relationships, support people emotionally and ensure their overall wellbeing was consistently valued.

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’s cultural, religious and spiritual needs were assessed and recorded in their care plans. The registered manager confirmed adjustments were made to ensure people’s preferences were met. These adjustments included, changing care call times and meeting people’s preferences around staff.

Staff described how they considered people’s wishes and preferences when providing care. Such as, people’s preferences in relation to personal care support. Care plans also contained detailed information about people’s independence skills and the level of support they needed. This included the order in which people preferred tasks or personal care to be carried out. This level of detail helped ensure care was person‑centred, consistent and aligned with how people wanted to be supported.

The provider promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

People’s care plans were reflective of their individual abilities, strengths, goals and preferences. Relatives confirmed that both they and the people receiving support were involved in developing these care plans and that were supported to make choices as to how they would like their care to be provided. For example, what they would like to wear as well as choices for eating and drinking.

Care plans included a dedicated section focusing on promoting independence, ensuring people’s wishes were clearly identified, respected and recorded. Staff demonstrated their understanding of the importance of supporting people to maintain daily living skills wherever possible and described how they encouraged people to do as much for themselves as they were able.

The provider worked collaboratively with people to use their support hours flexibly in ways that enhanced quality of life. This included reducing hours when appropriate and reinvesting the saved time into meaningful activities such as accessing the community and participating in experiences important to the person. Relatives shared examples of staff supporting people with independent living skills, including cooking, completing household tasks and building confidence in accessing the community.

Staff supported people with transport and participation in a range of local opportunities, including dances, social meet‑ups, cooking groups and other community‑based activities. This approach strengthened people’s independence, broadened social connections and ensured the support provided aligned with what mattered most to each person.

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.

Relatives told us staff were responsive to changes in people’s health and wellbeing and that they were kept informed and updated. One relative told us, “Staff notice changes in her physical health.”

People’s care plans clearly detailed any specific health conditions and described how these presented in day‑to‑day life, enabling staff to recognise when individuals required support.

Staff demonstrated good knowledge of the people they cared for and were able to identify when someone’s needs were changing. They understood the appropriate actions to take in response and escalated concerns when required. Senior staff routinely reviewed daily records, which helped them identify emerging patterns, changes in presentation or increasing support needs, ensuring that care plans were updated and adjusted accordingly.

The registered manager was able to clearly describe the process for ensuring people accessed the right support and assistance when their needs changed, demonstrating a proactive and person‑centred approach. They shared examples of how the service had responded effectively to changes in people’s mobility and health. This included supporting timely referrals to occupational therapists and arranging for equipment to promote safety and independence.

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

Staff reported feeling valued, respected, and supported in their role. They confirmed they could contact the office, who operated an open-door policy, if they had any concerns.

There was a culture of staff safety. Policies and procedures were in place in relation to lone working and monitoring stress in the workplace and there was a robust on call system in place to support staff out of office hours.Leaders took proactive steps to promote staff safety, particularly when working in the community. For example, staff were equipped with torches, provided with clear parking guidance, including photographs, and advised of the safest, best‑lit areas to park at different times of the day, especially during evening or night visits.

Leaders demonstrated an inclusive and supportive culture, creating opportunities for staff to connect and feel part of a team. This included special interest or peer‑support groups, social activities and themed celebration days to mark events throughout the year. These initiatives contributed to a positive and supportive working environment.