PentaCare (West Kent)

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 82 (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 was exceptional at making 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 described being actively involved in decisions about their care and support, particularly when needs changed. One person told us, “All the care they provide is tailored to meet my needs.” Another explained, “They do the care in the way that I like it.” Feedback consistently showed people felt listened to and that their views influenced how support was provided.
We reviewed records relating to people with a wide range of needs including dementia, stroke rehabilitation, complex physical health conditions, live-in care arrangements and community support. Care records reflected people's individual circumstances and needs rather than a standardised approach. We found people only had care plans relevant to the support they required. For example, some records contained detailed guidance relating to oxygen therapy and escalation arrangements, whilst others focused on dementia support, rehabilitation goals, catheter care or community-based support. This meant information available to staff reflected the person's individual circumstances rather than a generic set of care plans.
Records also demonstrated that care and support changed when people's needs changed. We reviewed examples where falls, changes in mobility and professional involvement had resulted in reassessment, revised moving and handling arrangements, updated risk management plans and changes to equipment. Guidance for staff had been amended to reflect people's current needs and circumstances rather than remaining static. Staff told us, "The care plans are brilliant. They give a breakdown of what the person likes and how they want things done."
Staff also described how people were encouraged to direct their own support. One member of staff told us when with people they support they say, “I have read the care plan but is there anything. You lead the way and you tell me if there's anything I'm not doing the way you want it done.” This demonstrated staff sought to understand how people wanted their support delivered rather than relying solely on written records.
Reviews showed that people continued to influence the support they received after their initial assessment. We saw examples where support arrangements were amended following discussions with people about how they wished to receive support and where changes were made in response to feedback about staffing arrangements. Records demonstrated that people's views were listened to and acted upon.
Ongoing reviews considered more than changes in physical health needs. Records showed discussions about people's wellbeing, routines, preferences and day-to-day experiences. Actions arising from reviews led to changes in care planning and support arrangements where required, helping to ensure care remained relevant to people's lives and reflected their current wishes and circumstances.

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.
We saw evidence of partnership working with healthcare professionals including GPs, occupational therapists and district nurses. Care records demonstrated professional recommendations were incorporated into care planning and reviewed when needs changed. Ongoing monitoring arrangements and governance systems supported continuity of care and identified when changes to support arrangements were required.
People and relatives spoke positively about continuity of care and described receiving support from familiar staff teams. One person told us, “The carers are a pretty consistent team.” Another said, “They send people I know and they know me.” Records demonstrated care arrangements were adapted when necessary to ensure support continued to meet people's needs and preferences.
Staff described effective communication systems and told us they were informed of important changes to people's care through established communication channels, helping to maintain continuity and consistency of care.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.
People told us they were involved in discussions about their care and understood how support would be delivered. Care plans were in paper form in their own homes so they could review if they wished.
Care plans contained detailed information about people's needs, preferences, routines and communication requirements and were available electronically to support staff in delivering consistent care. Records demonstrated people were involved in discussions regarding their care and support and information from assessments and reviews was reflected in updated care plans. Staff described receiving communication regarding changes to people's care through established communication systems and records demonstrated care plans were amended when required.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback, raise concerns and be involved in decisions about their care and support. People told us they were involved from the point of assessment and were able to influence how their care was delivered. One person explained, “I'm very much involved with my care plan. They discussed it and agreed it with me at the beginning.”
The provider had established processes for gathering feedback through reviews, wellbeing checks and regular contact with people and their relatives. Records showed feedback was not only gathered but acted upon. We saw examples where people requested changes to call times, adjustments to support arrangements and amendments to care plans, which were subsequently implemented. Care records also demonstrated people remained involved in decisions when their needs or preferences changed.
People described feeling listened to and gave examples of the service responding positively when concerns were raised. One person told us, “I didn't gel with a member of staff... They didn't send them again.” Another said, “There's the odd one I've complained about and they haven't sent them again.” These examples demonstrated the provider respected people's views and took action when people asked for changes.
 

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. They maintained systems to respond to concerns outside normal operating hours. People and relatives told us they knew how to contact the service and felt able to seek support when needed. One person said, “They are always on the end of a phone if I need them 24/7.” A relative similarly explained, “We can contact someone 24/7 as we have a mobile number for out of hours.”
The provider demonstrated flexibility when people's needs changed and adapted support arrangements following hospital discharges, changes in health and requests from people and families. Governance and review systems monitored care delivery and identified where additional support, reviews or interventions were required to maintain access to appropriate care.

Staff and leaders were innovative in how they listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes. Staff and leaders actively used this information to provide exceptionally tailored care, support and treatment in response to this.
The provider actively considered people's emotional wellbeing, social inclusion and community participation and used this information to shape support and improve outcomes. Staff routinely explored loneliness, mood, wellbeing and social participation. Records demonstrated concerns relating to these were identified and resulted in additional support, involvement of family members and consideration of opportunities for social engagement. This meant people's social and emotional wellbeing was considered alongside their physical health and care needs.
The provider had developed a range of initiatives aimed at reducing social isolation and improving wellbeing, including community events, newsletters and wellbeing activities and the PentaCare Story Time Book. These initiatives were developed in response to feedback from people and relatives and demonstrated a proactive approach to improving people's experiences beyond their assessed care needs. The Story Time Book encouraged people receiving care and staff to share personal stories and life experiences and was developed specifically to promote social connection, inclusion and meaningful engagement.
People and relatives described positive outcomes from these initiatives. One person told us, “They invited me to a summer tea party. They have made a big difference to me.” A relative explained, “She was invited to a tea party organised by them. She was very reluctant to go but she loved it. It was great stimulation for her.” Records also evidenced positive outcomes relating to community participation, confidence and emotional wellbeing. Together, this demonstrated the provider actively sought to reduce inequality in people's experiences and outcomes by identifying risks of loneliness and creating meaningful opportunities for inclusion and participation.
 

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 records demonstrated consideration of changing health conditions, future risks, deterioration, end-of-life wishes where appropriate and increasing support needs. Reviews and reassessments ensured care plans remained reflective of people's current circumstances and future support requirements. Professionals were involved where required and records demonstrated planning following hospital admissions, changes in mobility, worsening health conditions and changing functional abilities. Care plans contained clear guidance regarding escalation processes, professional involvement and ongoing monitoring arrangements to support future planning and continuity of care.