Selective Care

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 inspection this key question was rated good. At this assessment the rating remains 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.

People told us that staff were kind, patient and respectful. They told us they had formed trusting relationships with staff who understood their needs. People told us that staff conducted personal care support to a high standard. Relatives told us that staff respected people’s wishes around their grooming and personal appearance. One relative told us, “They (staff) provide care to a high standard and (my relative) is always well groomed.”

Staff spoke about people with warmth and compassion. They told us they were sensitive to people’s needs and treated them with kindness and respect. One staff member told us, “I always try and treat people like how I would like my Mum to be treated (if she was receiving care).” Staff promoted people’s dignity when delivering care by respecting people’s wishes, speaking politely and ensuring personal care was carried out in privacy.

Senior staff monitored staff’s performance through spot checks, whilst they worked with people. They championed and recognised staff when they displayed caring, empathetic behaviours that promoted people’s dignity. This helped to embed this approach in staff’s everyday working practice.

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 told us that they were treated as individuals, and their care was designed around their needs. They told us that they participated in planning their care and the provider listened to their views and perspectives.

The registered manager fostered a culture that valued people as individuals. They told us they encouraged staff to be ‘active listeners’ and take an interest in people’s everyday lives, hopes and aspirations. Staff told us they spent time with people to give them comfort and companionship. One staff member said, “It is wonderful that you can help somebody to have a good day. It makes me feel good to know they (people) are happy.”

The registered manager modelled and embodied a caring and empathetic ethos. They carried out welfare visits to people if they were unwell physically or mentally. They also visited people when their commissioned care visits had been paused due to hospital admission. This reflected a genuine care and interest in their welfare.

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 they were given choices about the staff that supported them. This included being able to request male or female staff. They told us that if they felt their existing staff were not compatible with their needs, alternative staff were found. For example, one person told us, “I insisted that I only have carers that like the dog as she is my family. They (senior staff) said this is no problem.”

Staff told us how they encouraged people to remain as independent as they wished. This included working with people to identify areas of their daily lives they did not support with and ensuring they were led by people’s requests and wishes.

People’s care plans were reflective of their abilities and strengths. People told us they were involved in developing care plans and that they were reflective of their choices around support with personal care.

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 told us that staff were responsive to their needs and acted to keep them safe and comfortable. For example, one person told us how staff had found them after falling. The staff member contacted emergency services and stayed with them until the ambulance arrived. They told us that senior staff were responsive to their immediate needs and would come out to provide support if incidents occurred.

The provider had systems in place to respond to people’ immediate needs, for example the telephone based out of hours telephone service enabled people and staff to contact senior staff in an emergency. The registered manager was quick to implement short term increases in care if people’s needs changed, often providing additional care calls themselves until more permanent staffing solutions could be arranged. Staff had a good knowledge about when people’s needs were changing and the actions required to ensure concerns were reported and recorded. This helped to demonstrate to commissioning authorities how people’s care needs were changing and their care levels needed adjusting.

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 role. They told us that senior staff were engaging and took an interest in their professional development and wellbeing. Staff told us they had regular working patterns and were given sufficient travel time to complete their care calls safely.

Where staff had been recruited internationally, the provider understood the challenges of living and working in a new country. They had provided additional support to staff to help ensure they understood how cultural nuances may affect them in their role. Staff told us this had been helpful during their transition to living in the UK.