Morecare Services(UK)Ltd

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 staff were not always caring. People were not always treated as individuals with kindness and respect. Staff did not always work with compassion and did not always maintain people’s dignity, promote their independence or support to make their own choices. People’s immediate needs were not always addressed in a timely way. Although staff did not put any restrictions on people, people were not always supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives. The policies and systems in the service did not always support this practice. The registered manager cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and caring culture in the service. However, their lack of oversight of staff’s practice did not support or enable their staff to always deliver person centred care. Professionals provided us with mixed feedback about the registered manager and staff team, that indicated improvements were needed.

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.

People and relatives provided mixed feedback about staff’s support. People told us they did not always feel they were treated with compassion and kindness by the staff visiting them. Rights to privacy and dignity were not always supported and people told us staff did not always treat them with respect and dignity. People and their relatives said, “I don’t think they’re uncaring, it’s just [staff] are lazy. Clothes are just thrown down dirty and clean together and nothing is tidied up…[the person] is not being washed properly. I took [the person] to a podiatrist and in between the toes were disgustingly filthy”, “[The person] is deaf and [staff] do not speak good English so there is no communication. [Staff] don’t clear up when they leave and they sometimes sit using their phones” and “[The person] doesn’t feel unsafe with them, there’s just limited communication. [Staff] don’t always make a decision like [the person] had mouldy bananas on the top and they just left them to rot and they won’t or don’t clean the fridge out when it’s mucky”. One person added, “I do not appreciate being judged in my own home. I think the training is pretty good but perhaps it should be re-iterated that some people can make their own decisions in their own homes”. There were also some people and relatives who were complimentary about staff support and care provided.

The registered manager told us staff were trained to be compassionate and caring, and ensure they need met the needs of people. The registered manager said it was emphasised during staff’s training such as dignity, communication, equality and diversity. They also gathered feedback from people to oversee staff’s practices. The registered manager told us it would start with initial assessment to gather all the information about people to share it with staff. As the staff team and people communicate with each other, they would get to know each other better. The registered manager said newer staff would be paired with experienced staff to learn about people. Staff told us how they treated people with kindness, compassion and respect. Some staff also gave examples of supporting people’s privacy and dignity when giving personal care. Some staff made the comparison with caring for one’s family members. A staff member told us, “I introduce myself. It does not matter if I have seen them a hundred times. Before personal care I check that windows and curtains are shut. I’m about to wash you, is it okay?”. Another staff told us, “I tell them every step of what I’m doing.” Staff explained the importance of treating people with dignity and compassion, and of respecting their privacy such as observing their wishes and preserving their dignity during personal care. However, evidence obtained during the assessment process showed that the leaders did not always have a good oversight of staff’s practice due to mixed feedback received from people and relatives.

Professionals gave us mixed feedback about the provider. Some said they worked with them well and provider listened to their advice. However, they did not always ensure people were receiving care from suitably trained staff. They said, “Yes they do care and try [to be caring], but they send in staff that are not adequately trained for the job they need to carry out”. Another professional added, “The office staff are hardworking but from my visits I get the impression they are rushed off their feet at times and not well supported. I think communication is not always as it should be. On visits to their office, I find it chaotic at times and information asked for is not always easily provided as it cannot be found”.

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.

We did not look at Independence, choice and control during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

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.

The registered manager told us how they managed staff wellbeing and support on regular basis including regular communication to raise any issues or requests, any wellbeing or health issues staff may need support with and reminders to take a break. The registered manager noted the management team also supported staff to cover visits when needed. The registered manager recognised they had a staff team of diverse cultural background. They said the staff could freely contact the registered manager or assistant managers, whoever they found the most comfortable to speak to and share any information or issues. Staff had access to the nominated individual and contacted them when needed. The registered manager also told us they had a scheme to award the staff of the month which was influenced by feedback from people and relatives. Staff had opportunity to give feedback including anonymously and during staff meetings. Most staff told us the managers cared about the staff and promoted their wellbeing. Staff said, “They absolutely care”, “The company and managers care about us” and “They are a bit inclusive. They tend to listen to our ‘difficulties’ and complaints.” One staff added, “There’s room for improvement”. The staff told us managers supported and enabled them to deliver person centred care to people. One staff told us the participation of people and families was important. Another staff told us, “Service users are the key people”. The staff told us the managers valued them as staff so they felt part of the team and were able to contribute to decision making. One staff added, “We do contribute to decision making. We have a meeting once or twice a month”.

The registered manager had a process in place to help them promote the wellbeing of their staff, and supported and enabled them to help perform and deliver person-centred care. Staff were supported if they were struggling at work, and they had different ways to reach out to the management team including the nominated individual. Staff had access to personalised support that recognised the diversity of a workforce. Staff were valued by their leaders and their colleagues. They had a sense of belonging and the ability to contribute to decision making.