Prime 4 Care Ltd

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

People and relatives told us they were involved in the assessing, planning and reviewing of their care and support plans. Staff knew people well and felt trained and skilled to meet their needs. Staff felt they had enough time to support people to meet their health and emotional needs. Staff felt supported by office staff to seek health professionals’ involvement when required. People and relatives were satisfied staff knew what to do to provide effective care and always sought consent before any care tasks were undertaken. People had a care plan, but these needed more information to make the care plans person centred.

This service scored 58 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People felt they were consulted when the service started and most people reported that a member of the agency staff had been to visit them to discuss their needs and a care plan had been written. One relative said, “Social services were involved and I was involved in their care plan.”

Staff told us they knew people well, they knew what to do, how to do it and they usually supported the same people. Staff said this meant trust was built up. Staff said they were introduced to new clients and read care plans before any care was provided. Staff felt they had the information they needed. The manager said they assessed people before a service was provided to ensure they could meet people’s needs.

Processes needed improvement. The manager said an assessment of people's health and support needs was carried out but we could not see this information in people’s records. Three care plans we needed more information to ensure people received the care they needed. From speaking with people, we found people had health conditions and behaviours that were not recorded in people’s information. The manager agreed to review those plans, so they remained effective for staff to follow.

People told us their care and treatment was what they needed. One relative told us they had meetings with the provider and commissioners to reduce the hours of care. said, “I think their care plan was updated when we went down from 2 calls to 1 call. People felt involved in day to choices, one person said, “My regular carers always have a chat with me before anything is done and check that I'm happy.”

Staff told us they followed people’s care plans, giving people choice of how their care was delivered. Staff told us they followed guidance, for example when supporting a person with a specific medicine. Where a person received support from other health professionals, staff followed any guidance to meet ensure the person’s needs were managed.

Processes did not always evidence through people’s care information that people’s needs were met. The provider’s processes did not highlight this omission, however we found people received the care they needed. A relative told us health professionals were involved for their family member, but there was limited recorded evidence to support this. The manager assured us they would address this.

A relative felt the service worked well when sharing information with family and between those staff and external agencies who supported them. One relative said, “ I liaise with the care staff and the co-ordination team. I keep in touch with Prime 4 Care.”

Staff shared information and examples to us when they would contact health professionals for advice, support or guidance. Staff said they had supported people to contact their GP, and staff would inform the office if further interventions were required.

We asked health professionals for their feedback. We did not receive any feedback, however, conversations with a relative and the provider, showed health partners had been involved, consulted with and in some cases, the provider supported families at meetings. A relative we spoke with told us how important this was to them and how this was appreciated. This showed health professionals were involved when required.

The manager listened to their staff, supported them and made sure staff supported people who they believed would get on well with. The manager worked with other health agencies to make sure, people received the support they needed. Evidence from a relative showed the provider had supported them as a family to seek the support needed through continuous meetings.

People told us their health and wellbeing was maintained and the support they got helped them in everyday life. A relative told us how staff provided support to their family member to help reduce social isolation.

A staff member told us they would make referrals to other healthcare professionals to ensure people had the support they needed to promote and maintain their health and safety. They explained that if they had any concerns, they would contact the office. Staff told us they worked well as a staff team and communicated well with each other.

Support plans included guidance for staff to support people’s health. When people needed support for personal care, staff had the information to support this. Where people had specific health conditions, there was limited information available to inform staff, however staff knew what to do. The manager assured us people’s plans would be updated showing the support they needed and processes to make sure this was completed, improved.

People and relatives were complimentary about their care. Where people had a change in their health condition, a relative said staff responded well. People and a relative told us they could increase or decrease their care calls to fit in with their needs and choices as they changed.

A staff member told us they communicated well with other staff when they supported people. Staff had confidence they had the right information to manage people’s health and welfare needs. Staff said if needed, they could refer to daily records completed at visits to see how a person had been over a period of time.

Some processes were not always effective to make sure some clinical tasks were completed and recorded regularly, for example when applying a prescribed cream, or supporting people with mental health concerns. Families were confident support was provided, but this was not always evidenced.

People told us their consent was sought and followed by staff. A relative told us staff were kind and considerate, especially as their relative had certain repetitive behaviours. A relative said staff were understanding and patient. One person said, how they engaged well with staff and that they understood each other well.

Staff described the importance of seeking consent, whether the person had capacity or not. Staff gave us examples of when consent was sought, such as with supporting people with food and drink, personal care or if a person wanted something doing. Staff said they would always seek permission before any tasks.

There was limited evidence in care plans, people’s capacity was assessed. There was no information recorded to check people’s gender preference of care staff, even though this was supported. Processes were not effective at evidencing people’s choices. For person, they had fluctuating capacity but this was not reflected in their care plan. Where people had Lasting Powers of Attorney, this was known so staff understood who they should involve in care planning discussions. However, processes did not record this information.