Cera - Derbyshire

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.

This was the first assessment we had carried out of Cera Derbyshire since it added the service type ‘supported living’ to its CQC registration. At this assessment the service was rated Good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

This service scored 70 (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.

Staff were compassionate, kind and treated them with dignity and respect. For example, a person told us, “The staff are kind to me. The staff in the office are also kind and funny!”

Staff listened to people and communicated with them appropriately. Staff provided care in accordance with people’s preferences and requirements.

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 individual needs were understood and detailed in their person-centred care plans. Staff told us they understood the importance of treating people as individuals. Care plans included any relevant personal, communication, cultural, social or religious needs, which might be important for care staff to understand when providing care and support.

People’s care plans were available for staff to refer to for guidance on how to support individuals. A staff member told us, “I work in the [supported living] part of the service and that is doing really well. The permanent staff there basically run the service; it is very stable.”

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 experience real choice and control as far as they were able. People’s care needs, preferences, and aspirations were detailed in their individual care plans, and staff had access to those documents to use as a guide.

People were supported by staff to maintain as much independence, choice and control over their lives as possible. For example, a person told us, “I go to [a community based activity] twice a week, otherwise I usually stay at home on my days off. I decide what I want to do.”

People were supported to maintain relationships which were important to them. The provider was supportive of that and encouraged people to maintain those links.

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.

Staff were alert to people’s needs and took the time to observe, communicate and engage people in discussions about their immediate needs. Changes in people’s health status, and emotional states were also monitored. That information was used to find out how to respond in the most appropriate way to support people and ensure care was provided in accordance with their wishes.

Staff knew people well and could quickly recognise when people needed urgent help or when a person was starting to experience a decline in their wellbeing.

The provider did not fully demonstrate they always cared about or promoted the wellbeing of their staff. They did not always support or enable staff to deliver person-centred care.

Staff feedback was mixed in respect of the support they received from the senior staff in the provider’s office. For example, a staff member told us, “The office is okay with us. We get our rotas from there and the office ask us how the ladies are that we support. They are supportive of us. If we ask about something they look into it and get back to us.”

Other staff told us they did not feel well supported. For example, a staff member told us, “We used to have regular team meetings, monthly newsletters, carer of the month incentives, previous management would have drop-in days where carers could pop in for a brew and just have a catch up. Now we have nothing.”

Some staff told us they did not always feel the provider acted on the issues staff raised. For example, a staff member told us, “As far as I'm aware concerns are listened to. Although I'm not sure they are always dealt with.” Another staff member told us, “When I have raised concerns to the office, I haven’t heard back about any outcome or actions taken.”

We raised these issues with the registered manager who told us they would immediately take action to ensure there was better communication between the rota co-ordinators and the care staff. They also told us they would investigate other ways of engaging with the care staff, so they felt more supported.