Expectation Care Limited

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 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 treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.
One relative told us, “When [family member] was in hospital staff would visit them. Generally seemed they cared about [family member’s] health and wellbeing.”
Another relative told us, “They [staff] were great with [family member], showed dignity and respect. My [other relative] and I were very confident [family member] was in great care when we were not there. We took comfort in that. The support workers always seemed very nice, made time to talk to [family member].”
People told us how the carers respected their preferences and dignity by closing curtains and doors during support with personal care.
However, some language used on documents was not respectful, for example meeting minutes recorded, “[person’s] dementia is acting up and [person’s] getting rude to people.”
 

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.
One relative told us that staff had read religious text to their family member even when the staff followed a different religion.
Care plans included information about meaningful activities people took part in. Preferences, what was important to people, culturally important information including specific diets was also included.
Another relative told us, “They asked me what [family member’s] favourite tunes are, I have told some of them [person] was born in [birthplace] and they will ask them about that.”
However, daily records for 1 person with live-in care lacked details about meaningful activities they took part in.
 

The provider promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.
One person told us, “They [staff] always ask me what I want.” Another person told us, “Yes, they [staff] leave me to do whatever I want to do myself.”
One staff member told us, “I involve them [people] in their care as much as possible, I give them a choice of what to wear, what to eat, when they prefer care to be done.”
However, as previously noted, there was a concern that decisions restricting a person had been made by the provider rather than the individual themselves. This was due to care plans not demonstrating the person’s views or their involvement in the decision-making process.
 

The provider did not always listen to and understand people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff did not always respond to people’s needs in the moment or act to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.

There was a lack of evidence of action taken when staff identified concerns and following an incident.

However, people told us staff met their needs and shared concerns. One relative told us, “I think at one point [family member] did develop some red marks, and the district nurse left instructions for the care company and they keep checking. The carers did let me know, and I call the doctors.”

The provider cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff, and supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centred care.
Staff told us they had sufficient breaks and that rotas were developed to ensure they had the required time to meet people’s needs and time to travel between locations.
Staff told us, “They [managers] are very responsive and supportive as well.”
Another staff member said, “Yes, I would say if I need clarification for anything they [managers] are open to giving me advice, readily available if we reach out, available to assist.”
However, some records showed that staff had raised concerns but there was no evidence to show what action had been taken to address them.