Rapid Care

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

This service scored 67 (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's needs were assessed before they began delivering people's packages of care. The registered manager told us care coordinators spoke with people and their relatives to assess their support needs and preferences. People and relatives told us they had been involved in their assessments. A relative told us they were, “Satisfied with the care Rapid provides, the staff are helpful, understanding, and attentive to loved one’s dementia and mobility needs.” Another relative gave an example of how their loved ones needs had recently changed and staff adapted the care provided to meet their loved ones needs. Staff told us they reported any changes in people's needs to the managers or the office. However, we found this was not always done consistently and the management systems and processes in place had not always been effectively operated to ensure changes were robustly identified and updated.

The provider planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. They did this in line with legislation and current evidence-based good practice and standards. For example, a relative told us, “[Loved one had] a bedsore. While the district nurse handled the dressings, I believe the healing was largely due to the carers’ efforts in carefully positioning [loved one] and providing consistent, thoughtful care.”

Processes were in place to support people with their nutrition and hydration needs. People’s care records contained information in relation to the safety of their swallow, their appetite, level of independence and preferences. Staff were aware of these needs and delivered people’s support in line with their planned care.

The provider worked well across teams and services to support people. A relative told us staff worked well with another agency that was involved in supporting their loved one’s needs. Staff worked in partnership with each other as well as healthcare professionals to ensure people's needs were met. A staff member gave an example of how they had sought a second opinion regarding a pressure damaged area for a person they support to ensure the person received the care they required. Staff told us they checked the care records for previous care notes to ensure they were up to date on people’s needs and identified any changes or issues with the person's care.

The provider supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. A person said, “[The service was] very caring and supportive when I have been ill.” The management team and staff were proactive in seeking support and advice from other professionals to support people’s health and welfare needs.

Staff supported people to live healthier lives for example, supporting them to eat and drink or taking people to any appointments where required for their health and welfare. A staff member told us, “When some of the clients have appointments to see GP or Doctor some don’t like it so you need to speak to the client and encourage them to be strong and healthy. Some client’s staff do go with [to appointments]."

The provider had not always monitored and improved outcomes for people. For example, we identified examples of where staff had identified potential issues with people's care and instances where staff had not delivered or recorded people’s care as planned. These had not always been escalated in a timely manner to ensure people experienced positive outcomes. For example, concerns in relation to a person’s well-being.

However, some other people felt they had been supported to achieve good outcomes. A person told us, “[The service] enabled [them] to remain in [their] own home rather than moving into residential care.”

Staff felt they had supported people to achieve good outcomes and gave examples of how they had encouraged people to mobilise and this had enabled people to become more independent with their mobility.

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. Most people felt staff sought their consent each time they entered their homes and supported them with their personal care. Staff told us they respected people's wishes in relation to their care and treatment and understood the principles of the Mental Capacity Act. Staff described how they supported people to make choices they were able to. A staff member said, “Ask client with dementia what they want rather than just making it for them. If someone suffering badly only give 2 choices, if more capacity give a range of options.” Where people lacked capacity appropriate others were involved in decisions about their care.