Seeds Care 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

People were treated with kindness, empathy and compassion. Their privacy and dignity was mostly respected. However, there was no lock on the toilet door in one of the houses to ensure people’s privacy and dignity. No action had been taken to address this such as contacting the landlord or maintenance. The provider confirmed the lock had been mended during this assessment. Every effort was made to take peoples wishes into account and respect their choices, to achieve the best possible outcomes for them. This included supporting people to live as independently as possible and to maintain important relationships. People told us they took part in daily living activities to promote their independence.

This service scored 75 (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.

People were supported to maintain relationships with friends and family. People gave us positive feedback about staff. A person told us, “Staff are amazing and kind. I laugh a lot with the staff. They all have a sense of humour.” Another person (when asked about the support they received) signed "Good" for each member of staff in turn. People told us they took part in daily living activities to promote their independence. A person told us, “I do some cooking and help to tidy my room.”

Staff understood the importance of giving each person the dignity, respect, and personal space to explore their own sexuality in the privacy of their own room. Staff gave many examples of how they supported people to be independent and make their own decision as far as possible. For example, by offering 2 clothing options, encouraging people to choose their meals and providing support with cooking. They shared how they supported some people using hand over hand techniques, gentle prompting, guidance, and reassurances.

We observed meaningful interactions between staff and people, which showed that staff knew people well and knew how to communicate with them. Staff used respectful language when communicating with people and when talking about the people they supported. Staff called people by their preferred names. However, we observed there was no lock on the toilet door in one of the houses to ensure people’s privacy and dignity. No action had been taken to address this such as contacting the landlord or maintenance. The provider confirmed the lock had been mended during this assessment. People’s rooms had been personalised and contained things that were important to them. People proudly showed us their rooms and told us about the plans they had to change them to the way they wanted them to be.

Some of the language staff used in daily reports about people did not reflect best practice. Records showed that on one occasion a person’s electronic device had been taken away from them and for another person the internet they were using had been turned off. There was no detailed explanation of the reasoning for these actions. These actions had not been agreed in people’s support plans or guidance. We reported this to the provider as an area for improvement. Care plans contained a comprehensive assessment of daily living tasks together with what people could do for themselves and when they needed support. There was also information available about when people could undertake tasks by themselves but needed encouragement rather than physical support in order to do so independently. Staff described ways they supported people to be independent in the community by following training and support provided to them. This helped maintain people's independence whilst maintaining their safety. For example, distracting a person and walking closely with them to prevent them from putting themselves at risk of harm from running into a road or from self harming.

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.