Archived: Radis Community Care (Brunel Court)

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 requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to 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.

People’s care plans included the planned care tasks at each care visit. People and relatives were positive about staff, although some people preferred certain staff. One person said, “Staff talked to me a lot about it [accepting care] and now it works I’m glad of it.” Staff we spoke with were clear about putting people at the centre of everything they do and making sure there was enough information about the person available to support them how they would like. One staff member told us, “Talk to them to see what they are like and also family if they are visiting to find out about them.” This ensured people were able to receive personalised care.
 

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.

People told us they experienced good continuity of care in relation to staffing. One person said, “Lots of different carers come to help but I know them all.” Staff used QR codes on their devices to confirm they were in the call. This gave the manager assurance staff were at care calls at planned times. The manager was working on improving the timing of certain calls to meet people’s preferences. Staff had regular people they supported and knew them well. People and relatives confirmed this. The provider worked with professionals in the community to co-ordinate services to meet people’s needs. This helped to promote a consistent approach to the delivery of care.
 

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

People’s communication needs were assessed and documented in their care plans. Although the manager was not fully aware of the accessible information standard, there was support in place to aid with people’s communication needs. This included cards with pictures on to help, and the use of a translator where English was not the person’s first language. Staff also used a magnetic board to write on where the person was hearing impaired. This helped to ensure people’s communication needs were met.
Staff had a good understanding of the need to protect confidential information.
 

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.

The provider had a complaints policy in place which documented how people’s complaints and concerns would be investigated and responded to. Records of complaints received demonstrated the provider investigated and reported back to people with the outcome. People were able to make complaints through email or telephone, as well as in person to staff. Most people told us they were satisfied with how their concerns were listened to and acted upon by the provider. Where this was not the case, the manager had put in place regular meetings with people and their relatives to try and resolve the issues of the complaint.
The provider also obtained feedback from online reviews, letters and testimonials to better understand how people felt about their care. The manager shared the outcome from complaints with staff through team meetings.
 

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

The provider had equality and diversity policies in place. Staff completed equality and diversity training, which helped to ensure they understood the potential barriers to accessing care people may face and how they could be supported to overcome them. This helped to ensure people could access care and support when they needed, promoting equality and protecting their rights. The provider had an out of hours on-call system to support staff and people when needed.
 

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.

There were policies and procedures in place to help identify people at risk of suffering discrimination or inequality. Care plans and assessment processes reflected these factors had been taken into consideration in the planning and delivery of care. This helped to ensure people’s care and support promoted equality and protects their rights.
 

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.

Where relevant, people had end of life care plans in place. Care plans documented any advanced arrangements and specific preferences around their care. The provider worked empathetically with families to help ensure care was flexible and responsive to changes in people’s condition. The provider had received positive feedback from families of people supported during the end of their life. Staff told us they had a good understanding of what good end of life care looked like. Care plans detailed staff’s duties and the role of other professionals in supporting people to remain at home during the last days.