Link Community Care (Tottenham)

When issues were raised to the office these issues were not processed and dealt with appropriately. There were missed opportunities to advocate for people, assess the quality of staff practice, and learn lessons.

New staff, who did not speak English well, they needed more support to understand their role and the people they were supporting. People were sympathetic to this issue, but the management although aware of this issue, had not effectively revised how they were supporting this element of their work force. Some people told us this undermined their care experience.

We had a mixed response with how people found their care. Some spoke well of the regular staff who supported them. The staff knew what these people's needs were and how they wanted to be supported. These people had got to know the staff and felt comfortable in their company. One person said, "My main carer is excellent, [carer] treats me with respect." Another person said, "We [person and carer] have a good natter."

Others found staff did not understand their needs and what their care plan was asking of them. One person told us, "They [management] need to support those carers who have recently arrived from overseas."

Most people said they saw staff at regular times which they were happy with. Some people told us they had experienced late and missed care visits. The providers electronic system which logged when staff visited people, did not support this view, but some people were very clear about this.

People were generally supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; but there were issues with policies, systems, and management knowledge in relation to people's consent to care and being involved in decisions relating to their care.