Tender365 Care (UK) Limited

Safe – this means we looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. People said that they felt safe, they were positive about the care they received. Staff knew how to escalate safety concerns. The provider ensured that staff had safeguarding training and stated that they would investigate a safeguarding if it occurred. Processes were in place for pre-assessment of people’s care and support needs before they started receiving care. However, these lacked detail and contained contradictory information .

Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment, and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence. People’s needs and rights were supported. Staff were aware of people’s preferences and respected these. People consented to their care and treatment. However, we found inconsistencies with the recording of people’s health needs and there was a lack of detail in the assessment document, meaning the care staff may not have information they require to provide safe care.

Caring– this means we looked for evidence that the service involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity, and respect. The person cared for said that the care staff were kind and compassionate and the provider engaged with them to obtain their feedback on the service.

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the service met people’s needs. This is the first inspection for this newly registered service. The person said the service met their needs. The provider gathered feedback and arranged regular spot checks of care to ensure it that it was of high quality.

Well-led – this means we looked for evidence that service leadership, management and governance assured high-quality, person-centred care; supported learning and innovation; and promoted an open, fair culture. The service provided person centred care but only to 1 service user. We found a breach of the legal regulations in relation to governance. There was limited information to evidence effective oversight and support that learning and innovation took place and that there was an open and fair culture.