Inspire Neurocare Worcester

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

Caring – this means we looked for evidence that the service involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect. At our last inspection we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment the provider had made improvements, and the rating has changed to good. People and relatives told us they were supported by staff who were caring and compassionate and we also observed this. One person described staff as their family. We saw people were promoted with their independence, choice and control over their lives.

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.

People were supported by staff who were kind, caring and compassionate. One person described staff as, “more like friends than carers” and told us they had been feeling down. A staff member recognised this and supported them to an activity, they told us this was, “A small act of kindness which really helped improve my mood for the day”. Relatives told us their loved ones were treated well and staff respected them.

Staff were mindful about ensuring people were treated with kindness and respect and told us how they promote people’s dignity. We saw evidence of appropriate referrals made to the bowel and bladder clinic when people had had their dignity compromised when accessing the community.

Professionals did not raise any concerns in this area, one professional described staff as “excellent”.

We observed positive interactions where staff clearly knew people’s care needs well. Staff had developed a rapport with people and their relatives.

People received individualised care from staff who knew their care needs well. People had preferences of how their rooms should look during themed events during the year, staff had supported them to access the community and purchase items to decorate their rooms to suit their preferences.

Staff and leaders were knowledgeable about people’s previous life histories, which they promoted at the service. For example, a person used to be part of the farming society and enjoyed growing vegetables. Staff had supported the person to grow and take care of their own vegetables at the service.

We observed staff interacting with people in a personalised way, which evidenced they knew people well. Staff spent time with relatives to offer reassurance and guidance if they had any queries or concerns.

Leaders had produced short profiles for each person. This contained essential clinical information about them, along with people’s preferences to ensure all staff, especially agency staff, had the information they needed to meet people’s individual needs.

People and relatives told us activities and engagement had improved since our last visit, and this was evident from people’s care plans. People were more involved in the wider community and had established links with external providers.

Staff were more involved in planning activities and events with people and were looking forward to a Halloween and bonfire event they had arranged. Staff understood the importance for people to maintain relationships with people who were important to them. The service held a Neuro café on a weekend where people were encouraged to invite family and friends.

We observed people to be involved in activities either in a group or individual setting. The home was spacious and accommodated when people chose to have quiet time alone or carry out their own exercise regimes in privacy.

Since our last visit the provider had made improvements with enabling people to access the community for either personal activity choices, or links with external providers, such as hydrotherapy and sensory therapy sessions. This had significantly benefited people. We asked the provider to review their documentation when recording people’s activities, to ensure they were capturing people’s involvement and progress.

Most people and relatives said they were listened to, and their wishes were accommodated. People had detailed communication information in their care plans. Where people required additional communication aids to raise alerts to staff, these had been implemented and reviewed for their effectiveness. For example, a person was trialling a smart box as they wished to maintain communication with their family.

Most staff told us they were able to meet people’s needs during their shifts. A staff member said they felt some days the role was task orientated and there are sometimes not enough staff which could take away the caring aspect of the role.

During our observations, staff were not rushed when working and we observed good staff presence throughout the service. People did not have to wait long for assistance.

The provider had a wellbeing lead at the service. One staff member described them as “a great support”. The culture of the service had improved since our last visit, staff were invested in improving the quality of service provided to people. One staff member said” Things are much better, there is potential for the place to be phenomenal”.

The provider had policies and processes in place which supported the staff, people and management team. These included daily meetings, staff supervisions and regular training. The senior leadership team visited the service on a weekly basis and encouraged staff to contact them directly, should they have any suggestions, concerns or queries.