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.

People were positive about staff. Comments included, “Staff support my choices. I’m quite happy”, “The staff team here is amazing”, “I get on well with staff” and “We have the best team here. All good at different things.”

Staff interactions showed people were treated with kindness, empathy and compassion and staff respected their privacy and dignity.

The registered manager 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 to ensure people were being treated with respect and dignity.

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 to care were made to ensure people’s preferences were met. For example, 1 person had been supported to have their staffing adjusted, enabling them to attend midnight mass.

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 level of detail helped ensure care was person‑centred, consistent and aligned with how people wanted to be supported. One person told us, “If someone is new (staff), I’ll tell them first how I like to be treated as a person and how I like 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. Staff supported people to make decisions about their daily lives and encouraged them to do as much for themselves as they were able.

People confirmed they were supported to make choices about how they wished their care to be provided. This included everyday decisions such as what they wanted to wear, what they wanted to eat and drink, and how they wished to spend their time.

People shared many examples of how they were supported to make choices and exercise control in their day‑to‑day lives. Comments included, “Staff support my choices” and “I buy my own food. When it comes to shopping, I know I can buy near enough whatever I want, but if I needed to save for something staff support me to budget. They make sure I can pay my bills and do what I want to do.” People also spoke about the opportunities they had to engage in meaningful roles and activities, with 1 person telling us how they were supported to carry out their volunteering role.

People’s care planning promoted independence, with some care plans including specific sections focused on promoting independence, ensuring people’s wishes were clearly identified, respected and recorded. However, we found this was not consistent and some plans did not always have enough detail about the specific areas where people could be involved. For example, some independence sections simply stated that a person required full support, rather than identifying opportunities for involvement in smaller or meaningful ways. The provider had identified this was an area for improvement prior to the assessment and work to enhance the level of detail in care plans was underway at the time of the assessment.

Staff demonstrated a strong understanding of the importance of supporting people to maintain and develop daily living skills. They described how they encouraged people to do as much as possible for themselves, offering appropriate guidance and reassurance while respecting people’s autonomy. One person told us, “I want to be independent, do my own things. Decisions I want to make for myself. I want to take control of my life. Staff help me do that and listen to me.”

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 and relatives told us staff were responsive to changes in people’s health and wellbeing. Comments from relatives included, “The staff know when he is having a down day, can recognise the signs” and “Staff recognise when he is feeling low. They will sit and talk to him and solve any problems together.”

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 when changes occurred 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 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 appropriate 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 mostly reported feeling well supported through regular supervisions and team meetings. The registered manager’s open-door policy and inclusive leadership approach fostered a culture of openness supporting staff to raise concerns and contribute to service improvement. Senior leaders were described as responsive and accessible, with effective communication and guidance that contributed to a positive working environment.A small number of staff reported feeling less supported at times, but this was not reflected across the wider staff team.The registered manager was supporting the senior team to promote consistent, supportive practice across the service. This promoted a consistent leadership approach and strengthened support for staff.

Staff felt valued and informed. Comments included, “[Registered manager’s name] listens to us and how we’re feeling”, “I feel listened to. They care, they check in with me”, “[Registered manager’s name] is brilliant. Makes you feel valued as a staff member” and “Communication is excellent.”