Lifeways Community Care (South London)

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 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.

Improvements had been made to ensure care plans were person-centred and contained detailed information about people’s unique histories. They had completed pen profiles including detailed information about who they were, things that were important to them, the things they liked and didn’t like to do, how they preferred to communicate and the support they needed if they became distressed. Staff had a very good understanding of people’s needs. They were able to tell us in detail about people’s individual needs and wishes and how people liked to be supported. One member of staff told us, “Each person’s care plan is person-centred and detailed, giving us all the information we need to meet a person’s needs and wishes.” A community-based care professional added, “My client is very well attended to by staff and their approach to care person-centred.” Assessments and care plans were developed collaboratively and included people’s views and how their personalised support would be delivered.

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, and ensured care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

People received continuity of care and support from a dedicated group of staff who were assigned to work exclusively in a particular service. In addition, staffing levels were stable with the provider experiencing low rates of staff turnover which managers told us had improved in recent years. This meant staff working in a specific service were experienced and familiar with the needs, strengths, preferences and daily routines of the people who lived there. Staff demonstrated strong commitment, teamwork and compassion, which supported both their wellbeing and the quality of care provided.

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

The provider made sure people were given information in ways they could understand so they could be involved in decisions about their care and support. Managers and staff worked closely with people they supported and community-based care professionals to understand how each person communicated their wishes and to ensure essential information they needed was accessible and understood. Staff used verbal, written and pictorial information to support people’s understanding. We saw a telephone that a person used had extra-large numbers on it to make easier for them to call the people they wanted.

Several care plans made it explicitly clear that staff needed to speak slowly and clearly and use simple, plain language to effectively communicate with certain individuals to ensure they would be understood.

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 had regular opportunities to speak to the service manager and the staff working there. People felt listened to and involved in making decisions. One person told us, “I know I can talk to the service manager and staff about my care plan, and they always involve me in any discussions when it needs to be updated. Staff invite me to my care plan review which happens regularly and they are always quick to clarify things if I don’t understand what’s in my care plan.” People were provided with easy to access and clear information about how they could report concerns and how these would be dealt with by the provider. Staff used a range of methods to encourage people to have their say and state their views about the care they received, including regular one-to-one sessions with their designated keyworker, spot check monitoring visits to each service conducted by quality assurance managers, care plan reviews and satisfaction surveys.

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

People had equitable access to the service, and support was adapted to ensure their needs, preferences and circumstances were met. Records showed people received care and support at times that suited them, with daily routines and activities planned around their choices, preferences and needs. Adjustments were made to promote inclusion, safety and choice. For example, staff ensured peopled expressed preference in relation to the gender of staff who provided their personal care, was always sought and respected. This demonstrated a commitment to equitable access that accounted for personal comfort, privacy and cultural considerations. Care plans clearly documented this preference, and staff confirmed it was always adhered to.

People had sufficient opportunities to engage in meaningful leisure, educational and vocational activities that reflected their social interests and needs. Staff actively supported people to regularly attend a range of activities in the wider community including, going out shopping and for meals locally. People and their families were supported to be involved in discussions about people’s social interests, which was recorded in their care plan.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care and support in response to this.

Managers and staff respected and valued people’s individual characteristics, diverse needs, personal routines and need for consistency. They assessed and planned for people’s diverse needs and made sure barriers to providing care were identified and mitigated. For example, accessibility assessments had been carried to identify potential barriers a person with mobility needs might face when access the wider community including, using public transport and attending appointments at the local GP surgery. People’s care records contained information about their individual needs, including those relating to communication, social, cultural and religious needs. Staff understood people’s right to receive care and support that met these needs. They had received equality and diversity training to help ensure people received fair and equal treatment. Staff undertook training to understand about equality and diversity. Managers reinforced this learning through supervisions and meetings.

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.

Staff supported people to plan for the future. People set personal objectives and were supported to work towards these. The provider made sure people’s care was reviewed as their needs changed. This included promoting healthier lifestyles, adjusting diets and increasing access to exercise and health monitoring. Staff worked with other professionals to help ensure people had opportunities to move on when this was right for them. Staff told us they routinely discussed future aspirations regularly with people such as what they would like to do in the future, and this included how they wanted to maintain their independent living skills and how this could be achieved.

People did not require any support with end-of-life care at the time of our assessment. People and their families were supported to be involved in discussions and participate in decisions about their end-of-life care wishes, which were recorded in their care plan. Where people and their families had declined to discuss end of life care wishes these were also included in their care plan and routinely reviewed. Staff had received end of life care training.