Amber Home Carers Surrey

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 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 and their relatives told us staff were caring and respectful. One person told us, “They’re very respectful and treat me with great dignity.” One relative told us, “All the staff are extremely polite and very kind.”

Rotas were designed so people were supported by the same group of care staff wherever possible. This enabled people and staff to build trusting relationships over time. Staff we spoke with were able to describe how they supported people in a way which maintained their dignity such as ensuring doors were closed, curtains drawn and people were covered wherever possible when receiving personal care.

The provider did not always treat people as individuals or make sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. They did not always take account of people’s life histories.

We received mixed responses from people and their relatives regarding how well their individual circumstances were taken into account when providing support. One person told us, “They know me very well. They know how I like things to be done and respect that.” Feedback from others reflected that whilst people’s regular carers understood their needs and preferences, this was more difficult when new carers had to step in to cover.

Care records did not always contain detailed and personalised information. Whilst people’s basic needs were recorded, there was little information in relation to their life history, preferences and family situation. Whilst this was mitigated to a degree as people were regularly supported by staff who knew them well, this lack of information would be a barrier to new staff building trust and personalised relationships.

In other instances, people’s care records provided information regarding their individual circumstances, preferences and hobbies to support staff in building a rapport.

Following our assessment the provider informed us they reviewing how information was presented to make this more person-centered.

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

People told us staff supported them to maintain their independence. One person told us, “They help me to do as much as I can for myself when I’m washing and dressing and when I get my dinner in the evening. They do it in a kindly way.” One relative told us the support provided to their loved one meant they were able to remain in their own home which is what they wanted.

People’s care plans directed staff to offer choices and support people in making day to day decisions such as what they wanted to eat and choosing their clothes.

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.

We received mixed responses regarding how staff responded to people’s needs and the support and encouragement they provided. One relative described concern regarding the lack of respect staff showed for their loved one’s home, such as not making the bed, not taking rubbish out or washing bedlinen in line with the persons care plan. They felt staff did not acknowledge their relatives’ feelings and how they wished to live. Other comments stated staff were responsive to their needs and would always contact the office or health professionals if they were unwell.

Daily care records showed a lack of consistency in how staff approached people’s care. Care notes for some people reflected staff checked they were comfortable and did not need anything prior to leaving them. However, for others, records listed the tasks completed and did not demonstrate a personalised approach where people’s comfort was considered.The service supported people to ensure they were able to attend hospital and other health appointments by booking transport and accompanying them where appropriate.

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 felt supported in their roles and could call on the management team for support when needed. One staff member told us, “The office will always come back to you. They listen to what we tell them.”

Regular welfare checks were made to staff to check on their well-being. Where concerns were reported action was taken to provided additional support. For example, one staff member reported feeling tired due to the nature of shift times and driving. The management team adjusted the staff member’s shift pattern and care calls and checked the changes were having a positive impact on the staff member’s well-being.