Elite Support Providers Ltd

On this page

• Overview
• Shared direction and culture
• Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders
• Freedom to speak up
• Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion
• Governance, management and sustainability
• Partnerships and communities
• Learning, improvement and innovation

We did not always find the registered manager displayed transparency with us as they failed to inform us that they were not using their registered office in line with their registration requirements. Governance arrangements were in place and audits were carried out by the registered manager. However, these were not always sufficiently robust to identify gaps or shortfalls. This related in particular to people’s care plans and medicines records which we found not to be contemporaneous. We found this was a breach of Regulation 17 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. Staff felt supported by management and told us they felt valued. They enjoyed their job and demonstrated a dedicated, caring attitude.

This service scored 71 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

There was a lack of transparency from the management team with us in relation to aspects of service delivery and how and where they were managing the regulated activity as they were unable to show us where their office was and as such provide us with documentation they told us they stored there. Staff told us they felt supported and had the opportunity to attend regular meetings as well as daily handovers. A staff member told us, “(We have a meeting) every month. They are worthwhile. We discuss any issues.” A second staff member said, “I have a lot of support. This is like family, there are lots of people working here. We get support from them. Whenever we need them (management) we can call them.”

Staff told us they felt they all shared the same drive to support people well. Staff meetings were held in which management and staff discussed all aspects of the service, any concerns they had and where they felt improvements were needed.

Staff said they enjoyed the work they did and it was evident from the way they talked about people they were fond of them. Staff said, “[Registered manager] makes me feel valued” and, “We are supported by our manager” and, “Good teamwork and everyone has the same mentality of wanting to help. No one comes in to do it just as a job.”

Staff meetings were held monthly and staff had daily handovers. This helped ensure that staff had the most up to date information about a person. Staff also told us they had a group on their mobile phones which they could use to exchange information.

We did not look at Freedom to speak up during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

Staff told us they felt the registered manager had their best interests at heart. They said the registered manager always ensured they had sufficient time between care calls. A staff member said, “Agreed we have travel time between calls and we have enough time (at the call).”

People’s care plans were not contemporaneous which would make it difficult for a new member of staff. For example, some people’s care plan had mixed information about call times or length of calls. One person's said they had 2 calls a day, but this was not the case. Another's said they had 3 calls a week, but daily records showed the calls took place on different days to those recorded in the care plan. Both people's care plans stated the time of their calls, but these differed from when staff were visiting. Care plans lacked detail. One person had a learning disability and was non-verbal, yet this was not clear in their care plan and there was no specific information around how their learning disability may affect them. A second person was diabetic but there was no care plan in place covering this. Regular audits did take place, although processes were not always sufficiently robust to identify where improvements were needed. Audits had not identified that one person's calls were not taking place in line with their care plan. We also found medicines records were not always accurate. We were provided with three months’ of medicine administration records (MARs) for one person and found that one of the person’s medicines was missed from their MAR for the second month, but written back again on the MAR for the third month. This demonstrated a lack of processes in place to check records were accurate.

We did not look at Partnerships and communities during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Learning, improvement and innovation during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.