Calverton Supreme Home Care

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

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 68 (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 ensured people were at the centre of their care and treatment decisions and worked in partnership with them to respond to changes in needs. People had personalised routines for each care call, co-produced to guide staff on how they wished to be supported. Records and feedback confirmed people received person-centred care. One person told us, “They are very amenable. They will accommodate changes in care times when needed.” This meant people received care that was personalised, flexible, and responsive to their preferences.

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, ensuring care was joined-up, flexible, and supported choice and continuity. People and families told us staff supported them to make and attend healthcare appointments. Staff knew people well, which helped provide consistent, personalised care. One person said, “I am happy with the care I receive from the carers. My wife has late dementia, and they are patient and kind to her. They give her food and medication. Her care needs are much more complex than mine and my care is excellent. We have no complaints. “This meant people received coordinated, responsive care that met people’s needs and promoted wellbeing.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate, and up-to-date information in formats tailored to individual needs. People told us the management team communicated well and kept them informed. One person said, “They follow the care plan which I had input to. The office are very responsive and I have always been able to speak to someone and had a good positive outcome.” The care manager confirmed that everyone received a weekly rota showing which staff would support them and at what time. This meant people were provided with information in a timely and accessible way.

Whilst people told us they were able to share feedback, raise concerns, or make complaints about their care, treatment and support. We found complaints were logged, however records did not always demonstrate how complaints had been investigated, whether they had been resolved, or what the outcomes were. In addition, documentation did not always evidence that learning had been identified and implemented to reduce the risk of similar concerns reoccurring. This meant the provider could not demonstrate that concerns were consistently managed in an effective way, or that feedback was routinely used to drive improvement and enhance the quality of care provided.

People told us they were given opportunities to discuss their care and provide feedback through regular care reviews. One staff member explained, “Seniors do reviews with the service users every 8–12 weeks to make sure they are happy with everything. If a service user complained to me, I would listen and then report it to the correct staff to resolve the complaint.”

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. The provider supported people in areas such as personal care, medicine and health appointments. This was done in line with people’s assessed needs to ensure everyone could had access to the care and supported they needed.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who were most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this. Managers, staff and policies demonstrated a strong commitment to upholding human rights. The service promoted equity and inclusion and had a policy in place to guide staff on how to put this into practice. People’s feedback demonstrated people received tailored care, one person told us, “The carers do an amazing job, providing very effective and respectful care to a man with dementia who has challenging behaviour.”

People were not always supported to plan for important life changes, including end-of-life care, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future. There was no care plan in place to provide staff with written guidance regarding people’s preferences for future care, including end-of-life care. A manager told us they did not routinely discuss end-of-life care needs or support. This meant staff did not always have clear guidance to support people’s wishes in important life decisions, and people may not have had the opportunity to plan for their future care. Since our onsite visit, the care manager has told us they have updated their systems and have plans in place to ask people if they would like to discuss their future plans.