Geocare Services 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. This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated requires improvement. This meant people did not always feel well-supported, cared for or treated with dignity and respect.

This service scored 55 (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 did not always treat people with kindness, empathy and compassion, or respect their privacy and dignity. Staff did not always treat colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect. People gave us mixed views on the staff supporting them, the consensus amongst people was staff were always rushing. One person told us, “Sometimes they are rushed, and they are just in and out, sometimes they don’t put food within my reach, and I have to push them to do things.” However, another person told us “Some are consistently good there is 1 that comes and does my washing”. Relatives told us “They [staff] seem fine they always clean up, do my relative’s meals and medicines. I have no complaints, and I think [person] would let us know if there is a problem”.

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 strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.Care plans lacked detail about what people could do independently, what mattered most to them, and the qualities they valued in the staff supporting them. This limited the ability of staff to deliver truly individualised care. However, when we spoke to staff, they could demonstrate some understanding of people’s needs when supporting them.

The provider did not always promote people’s independence, so people did not always know their rights and have choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing. Care records were not effective and failed to provide staff with person centred information which would further assist them in supporting people to maintain choice and control over their lives. Daily records showed limited evidence of staff encouraging individuals to carry out tasks for themselves. People and relatives told us some staff did not have adequate English language skills or competence to keep them safe. This placed service users at risk of harm. One person told us, “Some don’t speak good English, and I have to repeat myself it can get a bit awkward “. Another person said, “Some are chatty, but some can’t hold a conversation, I can’t understand them, and they can’t understand me”. A relative told us, “[person] struggles to understand them sometimes as they have a strong accent. I also struggle to understand them on the phone.”

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 spoke to staff who were aware of people’s daily care needs. However, other than contacting the manager for any concerns regarding people they were supporting, staff were not aware to seek emergency assistance from external professionals in the event of an incident. Although the provider told us they monitored the electronic call logs we were unable to see evidence of this.

The provider cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centred care. Staff felt supported, valued and listened to by management and said they were approachable and responsive. They stated if they had called the office for support, they had been quick to respond. Records showed they received regular discussions with the registered manager about their role.