We Care Chorlton

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

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

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

The care plans we reviewed were person centred. People felt involved in their care and we received positive feedback from people and their families. They told us, “We have a care plan. They do a review about once a year, but I can talk to them anytime and they keep in contact so it’s ongoing and very good” and “All the carers are extremely kind and caring and I feel safe knowing that I can leave [relative] with them. The carers are Asian and speak the same language as my uncle which has been wonderful.”

We did not look at Care provision, Integration and continuity during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Providing Information during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

Communication with people and their families was good. They were also able to raise concerns if they needed to. They told us, “If I need anything I just phone the office, they are all really good and very helpful” and “I think they are very good. They call me regularly to keep in touch, and I would phone [manager] if I had a big issue.”

Staff told us there was an open culture where they could raise concerns about poor practice if required. They were encouraged to report concerns to the office.

The service had effective systems in place to capture people’s feedback. People and their families were contacted by phone on a regular basis to request feedback on their experience of care. This regular contact helped to improve peoples’ experience of the service.

People were provided with information about how to complain. Complaints were logged on a central system and investigated to ensure shortfalls were addressed.
 

We did not look at Equity in access during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

We spoke to people and families about their experience of care. They did not report any barriers to care. Leaders and staff were alert to discrimination and inequality that could disadvantage different groups of people in accessing care, treatment and support. Staff prided themselves on being a local service and part of the community. This made them more able to remove any barriers to care where they occurred.

One person was supported to adjust their care during the holy month of Ramadan. Their daily routine changed significantly, particularly around eating, sleeping and prayer times. The care plan was changed to reflect this. Call times were adjusted to support their routine around fasting and breaking their fast. Staff supported them with preparing and leaving food ready for when they needed it.

The provider ran a community and faith transport service to ensure people who wanted to attend a religious setting wereable to.

Staff received equality and diversity training. This helped staff to understand and value difference.

We did not look at Planning for the future during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.