Eniola 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

At the last inspection the provider had failed to ensure that staff had training in mental capacity before starting to support people who needed support with decision making. People’s mental capacity had not been assessed appropriately and decisions about people’s best interests had not been made. This was a breach of regulation. Despite an ongoing issue with staff training (see our well-led section below), enough improvement had been made at this inspection and the provider was no longer in breach of regulation. People were supported by a staff team that knew them well and understood the importance of consent and providing people who needed support with help with making decisions.

This service scored 54 (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 Assessing needs during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at Delivering evidence-based care and treatment during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at How staff, teams and services work together during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at Supporting people to live healthier lives during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at Monitoring and improving outcomes during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

People and their loved ones told us that staff, despite recent changes, knew them well and listened to their requests. People told us they were given choices when supported and were treated respectfully. If there were a need to raise any issues or concerns people were confident to do this. Care planning was completed with people and their relatives or advocates, people were listened to and their wishes respected. A person said, “Yes I was involved in the planning.” Another added, “Yes, they ask us what they want us to do.” A relative said, “They sometimes use a sign or gesture to make themselves understood.”

Staff understood the importance of gaining consent from people. They supported people living with dementia and described to us the steps they took when providing care to people who could not always make decisions for themselves. A staff member said, “Dementia – talk to them, fairly, give time and options. 2 to 3 choices to make it easier.” We discussed mental capacity and how this may affect people. Staff understood mental capacity and told us they involved relatives to help with some decision making. A staff member told us that some people communicated using nods of their head to indicate yes or no.

Mental capacity assessments and best interest decisions had been completed when concerns had been identified. For example, one person regularly declined their medicines. A mental capacity assessment and best interest meeting had been completed which included the person, their representative and GP. The outcome was that staff were to continue trying to encourage the person to take their medicines. Care plans guided staff in the way people liked their care / support provided. For example, ‘wash face first’ – ‘ask me if I want to shave.’ Information included how to support people to maintain their independence, such as brushing teeth with information about how to support them to do this. Care plans contained an ‘about me’ section which gave details of people’s personal history as well as support needed and likes and dislikes.