Adejom Staffing Care

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 did not receive person centred care. Care plans and risk assessments were not person specific or person centred. Care plans we reviewed were identical for several people, and in some cases mis-gendered people or had other people’s names. Staff we spoke with were not able to give examples of how they treated people as individuals. We found a breach of the legal regulations in relation to person centred care.

This service scored 55 (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.

While some of the relatives we spoke to expressed that they were generally happy with the care their loved one received, our assessment found care did not meet the expected standards. Some relatives told us staff were kind and caring towards their relatives, however other relatives told us they lacked the skills and experience to deliver personalised care, for example to people living with dementia. One relative told us there was a significant language barrier which did not aid communication between staff and people.

While staff we spoke to told us that they treated people in a person-centred way, we found this was not always the case. Staff lacked detailed guidance on how best to support people and did not understand people's individual needs and preferences. People were not treated in a person-centred way. For example, a relative told us their loved one had not been supported to shave once since being supported by Adejom Staffing care, when previously they were always clean shaven. Staff did not know this was not usual for the person.

People were not treated as individuals, and care plans did not demonstrate person centred care planning. Some care plans we reviewed held the same information for different people, with no person-centred information. Some care plans contained other people's names, or misgendered people incorrectly. Some people lived with complex health conditions such as diabetes. There was no information within people's care plans to inform staff how this affected people as individuals. Daily notes we reviewed appeared to have been copied; with each care call containing the same or similar information. Although the provider told us they had identified this as an issue, there was no evidence to demonstrate they had spoken with staff or taken any action to stop this from occurring.

While some of the relatives we spoke to expressed that they were generally happy with the care their loved one received, our assessment found care did not meet the expected standards. People were not always supported to be as independent as possible. For example, people who had previously been mobile, now received care in bed. A relative told us this was because it was easier for staff to care for them this way.

While staff we spoke to told us they encouraged people to be as independent as possible, we found that this was not always the case. Staff we spoke with could not give us any examples of how they supported people to be as independent as possible.

There were no robust systems and processes in place to ensure people had choice and control over their lives. Care plans did not clearly detail what people were able to do for themselves, and what support they needed from staff. Relatives told us they were not always involved or supported to be involved in the care and support of their loved one. The provider failed to ensure there was a process in place to ensure people had choice and control of their care and treatment.

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.