Rance Healthcare Services Ltd

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.

This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated 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 and relatives were involved in care planning. A relative said, “I would call it more of a dictionary than a care plan. It’s about [person] and what he needs. It’s updated every 6 monthly to yearly. His interests are known so that they can chat with him about his interests. I agreed the plan with them and signed it.”

People and relatives felt care was tailored around people’s individual needs and reflective of their wishes, personalities and interests. Several relatives told us they could hear people laughing with staff during personal care and felt the staff had a positive impact on people’s wellbeing.

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 registered manager told us they tried to ensure continuity for people by arranging for the same group of staff to support them regularly. People’s feedback confirmed this.

The management team maintained regular contact with people and their families as well as key professionals including district nursing teams and GP’s. This helped to ensure people’s care remained consistent and any changes were shared with the relevant people.

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

People’s individual communication needs were assessed and included in their care plans. Staff followed this guidance to support positive communication and decision making. For example, 1 person used picture books to communicate their choices and others required staff to speak in their first language to help them make their own decisions.

Where people’s speech or decision making had been impacted by their health or disability, staff were aware and shared with us how they supported people to make choices and monitored for any sign of distress.

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.

People and relatives told us they regularly had the opportunity to give feedback about their care. Regular reviews took place and field care supervisors also visited people to check in and ask if any improvements could be made. None of the people we spoke with had ever felt they needed to make a complaint, but people knew how to if this was needed. A relative commented, “No, never made a formal complaint. I don’t feel the need to make a complaint. Things have never expanded to do that, as we work together in a [person] centred approach. We’ve agreed that with the carers. I talk to the manager, and we get a consistent package of care.”

There was a system in place for the management of complaints and records showed the provider had acted professionally when responding to concerns and taken learning from incidents and events.

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

People and relatives expressed no concerns about accessing the services or any barriers preventing them from accessing the care they needed. Records showed, and people confirmed the management team were proactive in supporting people to access services that supported their health and wellbeing. This included working alongside specialist healthcare professionals such as community nursing teams, GPs and pharmacies.

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 and the management team understood how people’s diverse needs could impact their experiences of care. Care plans included information about people’s protected characteristics and staff we spoke with were mindful of the impact, for example, of people’s religious needs not being met. One staff member told us, “Even though we know people, it’s important not to assume about their choices.”

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.

Care plans were in place which contained information about people’s wishes for the future. Where appropriate, end of life care plans were in place, which reflected people’s care needs and provided guidance for staff about how this may affect the person both physically and emotionally.

Where people had experienced significant life changes these were recorded in their care plans so staff could be considerate of people’s experiences.