Vision of Hope

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

We looked for evidence that the service met people’s needs, and that staff treated people equally and without discrimination.

Thisis the first assessment of this service since CQC introduced ratings.This key question has been rated as good.

This service scored 71 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The service made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices, and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to relevant changes in people’s needs.

People were supported to understand their condition and were involved in decisions about suggested treatments or dietary supplements. People knew what to do if they experienced problems or had questions following their treatment. People we spoke with described their consultations as personalised to their own circumstances and a strength of the service.

The service understood the diverse health and care needs of people, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

The service was able to offer continuity of care with the provider who provided all aspects of the service. People described the service as a useful part of their wider treatment for their illness or condition.

The service did not always provide accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

The service told us that people using the service were not always fluent in English. In this situation, people had typically used family members to translate. The service had not considered the risks of doing this, for example, family members might have variable translation skills in relation to technical or medical terms. The provider told us they would advise people about the possibility of arranging an independent translation service in future if they preferred.

The service’s website included information about the service, but this was not always up to date and described some treatments that were no longer available. It also described other professionals without making it clear that these people provided services independently and were not a direct part of the service.

However, people were advised in advance of the costs for consultations and courses of treatment.

The service enabled people to share feedback and ideas or raise complaints about their care or treatment. They involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

The service had not received any complaints over the previous 12 months. We saw evidence, for example, in the form of information on display, that the service was keen to understand and resolve complaints should these arise.

The service made sure that people could access the service and treatment, aftercare and related advice when they needed it.

People could access the service to suit their needs. For example, the service was available during each working day and was flexible about booking appointments to suit people’s needs. Waiting times, delays and cancellations were minimal and managed appropriately. The service told us they would discuss any reasonable adjustments with people before their first consultation enabling them to access the service. The service was accessible to people with mobility difficulties with the waiting area and treatment room located on the ground floor and a ramp available.

The service understood the needs of people using the service and had tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

The service understood the importance of providing an inclusive and non-judgemental approach to care and made adjustments to support equity in people’s experience and outcomes. The service treated people equally and without discrimination and provided an example of how they had intervened to address a discriminatory comment and de-escalate a situation calmly.

The service obtained feedback from people using the service.

The service provided support and treatment to help people plan and identify goals for the future when living with a life-changing and potentially life-limiting diagnosis.

People told us that talking about and planning for the future was something that the service did well. Some people said this type of support was not available to the same extent in more conventional treatment settings and they valued it. Some people said their personal mood and outlook for the future had benefited as a result of the support they received from the service.