Certitude London Shared Lives

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

The scheme 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 told us their coordinators and carers treated them as individuals and they received consistently good, person-centred care and support from them. The carers were familiar with the needs, preferences and daily routines of the people they lived with.

Care records contained personalised information about people’s unique strengths, likes and dislikes, and how they preferred staff to meet their care needs and wishes. This information was used when finding placements or when supporting people. Carers spoke about the thorough matching process, where time was taken for people being placed and potential carers could establish a rapport and build their relationship before a placement was approved. An external care professional told us, “We are confident in the schemes match making abilities so people are placed with suitable carers.”

Carers demonstrated good awareness of people’s individual needs and preferences. They were familiar with the term ‘person-centred’ and what this meant in terms of supporting people they shared their lives with. This meant that the scheme could provide care and support in a way that was person-centred and according to people's expressed wishes.

The scheme understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care as joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

Coordinators and carers understood peoples care needs and worked well with external health and social care professionals and bodies to consistently meet those needs. People received care and support from services that understand the diverse health and social care needs of their local communities.

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

Information about people’s preferred method of communication and their needs was included in each person’s support plan and communication passport. These records provided coordinators and carers detailed information about whether or not people could read, use the phone, communicate verbally, were sensory impaired and how information should be presented to them. In addition, each person had a decision-making agreement that provided guidance to carers about how to support people to make informed decisions and who needed to be involved.

Coordinators and carers demonstrated a good understanding of the individual communication needs of people. Photographs, large print and easy read pictorial cues and interpreters were used so people could understand essential information they needed to know about the scheme. This included the schemes license agreements, relevant policies and procedures, including their complaints form, and ‘Have your say’ surveys. The scheme had also sent easy read fire safety signs and guides so people and their carers knew what to do in the event of a fire. In addition, the registered manager gave us a good example of how the scheme had provided a person with easy read pictorial versions of their finances and what they were expected to contribute towards food and utilities bills which helped them budget their money. A translator had also been present at a person’s support plan review, so information they need to understand could be shared with them in their first language.

Coordinators and carers received Makaton training if the people they supported preferred to communicate using Makaton. Makaton is a language program that uses signs and symbols to help people with communication needs effectively communicate.

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

People were encouraged to express their views about their experiences of using the Shared Lives scheme. Coordinators were in regular face-to-face, telephone and email contact with people placed with the scheme and their carers. People were actively encouraged to be involved in decisions about the care and support they received from the carer/s they lived with. Carers also told us they had regular opportunities to speak to their allocated coordinators who they were in regular contact with. A carer said, “We get on extremely well with our coordinator who is always visiting us at our home and who I know I can contact anytime by email or phone.”

The schemes panel which met at regular intervals to approve new carers consisted of Shared Lives managers and staff, external health and social care professionals and current or former Shared Lives carers. This ensured a variety of different voices and views were heard and taken into account in the process of approving new carers. The registered manager told us they were actively encouraging people using the Shared Lives scheme to join the panel and take an active role in the process of approving new Shared Lives carers.

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

People received support from their coordinators and carers according to their individual assessed needs and wishes. People had access to external health care and social care professionals and bodies as and when needed. People were able to pursue social leisure activities they enjoyed. People were able to stay in regular contact with their friends and family.

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.

The scheme considered cultural and religious needs, and gender preferences when matching and placing people with their Shared Lives carers. For example, the registered manager told us they had placed several people with carers who shared similar cultures and practiced the same religion in accordance with peoples expressed wishes. The scheme also take into account peoples expressed wish to remain living in close geographical proximity to their family, places of work and day centre, for example.

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.

No one currently placed the scheme required any support with end of life care at the time of our inspection. People who had received end of life care and support at the scheme in the past had experienced a dignified death. People’s wishes for their end of life care, including their spiritual and cultural wishes, were discussed, and recorded in their end of life support plan. This ensured coordinators and carers were all aware of the wishes of people they supported, so those wishes would be respected at the end of their life. Coordinators and carers had received end of life care training.