The Alan Shearer Centre

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.

Support reflected people's individual preferences and interests. People accessed community activities and opportunities that mattered to them.
 

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.
The service worked collaboratively with people, relatives and professionals to ensure care remained coordinated and responsive to people's changing needs. Staff maintained regular communication with families and involved them in reviews, discussions about care and decisions affecting their family member's support. Relatives told us they felt informed and involved and were kept updated about important changes to people's health and wellbeing.
Staff worked closely with healthcare professionals, including GPs, learning disability teams and other specialist services, to ensure people received the support they needed. Care records showed changes in people's health, wellbeing and support needs were shared appropriately and acted upon, including referrals to healthcare professionals where concerns were identified. Information from healthcare reviews and multidisciplinary discussions was incorporated into care plans and shared with staff to help ensure support remained consistent and reflected current needs.
This collaborative approach helped ensure people experienced continuity of care and received joined-up support that promoted their health, wellbeing and personal outcomes.
 

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

People and families received information about the service and how to raise concerns. People and their families received information about the service and how to raise concerns. Information was available in accessible formats, including easy-read documents, pictorial complaints procedures, visual guides, symbol-supported information and personalised communication resources. Staff used a range of communication aids, including Makaton, objects of reference, visual schedules, photographs, symbols, gestures and communication passports, to support people to understand information, express their views and make choices about their care and support. Information and communication were adapted to meet people's individual needs and preferences, helping them to remain involved in decisions affecting their lives.
 

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.

Relatives and staff were encouraged to share their views, and feedback was listened to and acted upon. We saw evidence that concerns were addressed and outcomes communicated. However, the level of detail recorded did not always fully reflect the actions taken, which limited the audit trail available to demonstrate improvements.
 

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support, and treatment they needed when they needed it.

People had access to healthcare services, specialist professionals and activities that met their individual needs. Staff worked with healthcare professionals, including wheelchair services, to help people access the support and equipment they required. People were supported to maintain relationships with those important to them and take part in activities in the local community.
 

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.

Staff recognised that people had different communication, sensory and physical support needs and adapted support to meet people’s needs. Reasonable adjustments were made to help people participate in daily life and achieve positive outcomes. For example, specialist equipment and personalised support approaches were used to meet people's individual needs and reduce barriers to participation.
 

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.
Staff supported people to plan for their future goals and aspirations. For example, one person had expressed a desire to live more independently in the future. Staff supported them to develop their confidence and independence skills, helping them progress towards their personal goals while recognising the ongoing support they required to meet their needs.

The service discussed future care wishes with people and, where appropriate, their relatives. Although end-of-life care had been considered with families, the service predominantly supported younger people with learning disabilities and autistic people at the time of our assessment. As a result, some relatives did not feel ready to explore end-of-life planning in detail. Staff respected these views while ensuring opportunities remained available to discuss future wishes when people and families were ready