Unicorn Healthcare Services

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

People’s individual needs and preferences were not always reflected in their support plans. However, People cared for by regular staff felt staff knew them well and understood their preferences. People’s needs and wishes were not always communicated in their support plans. Staff were not supported or given opportunities to provide feedback or raise concerns to improve the service or staff experience. People told us they were treated with kindness and compassion. People were supported to have access to the community and friends and family.

This service scored 45 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People told us they were always treated with kindness and regular staff knew them well. Comments from people included “The carers are kind and treat me with respect”, and “They are sociable and genuinely respect [Person’s name].”

Staff told us they knew people well and supported them, however some staff raised concerns there was no information giving what people’s preferences were and unless you knew people well people are not always supported as they would like to be.

Professionals felt regular carers knew people well, however there were concerns about carers attending calls that did not know people well as support plans and risk assessments did not offer the guidance to care for someone with some specific health conditions.

Staff did not always treat people as individuals as support plans and risk assessments were not person centred and there was little evidence of involvement of people and their relatives. However regular carers knew people well and supported them in line with their individual needs.

Staff told us support plans and risk assessments did not identify people’s current needs, and people received person centred care because regular staff knew them well, there was no documentation to guide staff on how to treat people as individuals.

People’s individual needs and preferences was not reflected in their support plans and support plans were not reviewed or updated with people’s preferences. However, people were supported by staff and their families to have access to outside services.

People told us there was no introduction when new carers came. Some people told us if the regular carer is not available the service does not send anyone and does not notify them. Care was generic and did not consider the person’s needs, preferences and beliefs.

Information was not provided in support plans and risk assessments to enable staff to treat someone as an individual and consider their needs, preferences, and beliefs.

The registered manager did not have a process in place to ensure people received care and support which involved them. Restrictions were in place with decisions that had been decided with families without involvement of the person.

Although people’s initial assessment identified their immediate needs, support plans did not offer any guidance for staff to meet those needs.

Staff told us support plans were not up to date and did not identify people’s immediate needs. Staff told us managers do not come out and review people’s care needs with a view to updating support plans and risk assessments.

Staff told us the provider did not always consider their well-being and they did not feel valued by the provider. Comments from staff included, “I have never met the managers, but I have seen their photograph”, and “the mangers have no clue how we are feeling as a staff group, we have not even met each other, we have no support or team meetings.”

The registered manager had no process in place to identify how people were feeling about their job or the safety of the work environment. Health questionnaires were not completed routinely at induction to support someone to perform their duties and remain safe.