Initial Care Services South East 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

The provider did not always ensure people’s care was planned in a way which put them in the centre of any arrangements and decisions made and with a view of enabling people to do everything any other member of the community could do, including making unwise decisions. When people could experience different triggers of distress and challenges in their day-to-day lives, the support strategies we were told were in place did not always promote removing barriers for people to enjoy ordinary lives.

This service scored 62 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

We did not look at Kindness, compassion and dignity during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

We did not look at Treating people as individuals during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

While the relatives we spoke to expressed that they were generally happy with their loved one’s care, our assessment found care did not meet the expected standards. For example, people were not fully supported by the registered manager or staff to have choice and control over all aspects of their lives. Although people and their relatives told us people were in control of their support and their independence was encouraged, we found this was not always the case, and people were not empowered to make decisions or choices about issues that were important to their health and wellbeing.

The registered manager assured us people were in control of their support and their wishes and day-to-day choices would be respected. They told us they ensured staff knew how to respect people’s rights and how to promote their independence. However, people’s care plans were written in a way contradicting that. The registered manager’s verbal account of how people were supported did not always confirm the provider understood how to ensure people were always in control of their support and encouraged to be as independent as possible. Staff told us how they promoted people’s independence when supporting them, for example, with personal and oral care.

The provider did not always ensure people’s care was planned in a way which put them in the centre of any arrangements and decisions made. When people could experience different triggers of distress and challenges in their day-to-day lives, the support strategies we were told were in place did not always promoting people’s independence.

We did not look at Responding to people’s immediate needs during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

We did not look at Workforce wellbeing and enablement during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.