Global Caring Coventry

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 Requires Improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to 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 received support that was appropriate to their individual needs by staff who knew them well. One relative told us about their family member who had a health condition requiring support. They said, “[Name’s] calls are for 30 minutes, and the carers stay and get all the tasks done. Carers tell me if [Name] is not well. We get 1 visit daily in the morning. They encourage [Name] to have a shower and always respect their decisions. They will tell me if [Name] has refused and will offer them a strip wash.”

Staff explained how they supported people demonstrating they knew people well. One staff member told us how they supported 1 person. They said, “We transfer them with a hoist to commode to chair and after personal care we take them to the lounge. We reposition [Name] in a recliner chair and put their feet up and put on the television. They enjoy the television.”

Care plans detailed people’s individual needs, preferences and routines and were accessible to all care and senior staff. Information provided informed staff how people needed their care, when they needed it, and for how long. Important relationships were recorded, and if families supported their relative, this was included so they could retain control and choices over how people lived their lives.

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.

People received support from consistent staff which meant they had continuity in the care they received. New care staff were introduced to people before they started providing care and support so they could understand people’s individual needs.

The manager worked with other health and social care professionals to ensure people received the support they needed. For example, staff told us how they would inform the manager if people developed sore skin or a health issue that required attention so they could ensure action was taken to inform the appropriate healthcare professionals.

A relative told us,” The GP will come to the home and carers will call the GP or I will. The carers called the GP when [Name] had a cough and got antibiotics. I arrange the hairdresser and chiropodist. The carers called an ambulance when [Name] wasn’t well, they went to the hospital to check for a possible health issue, but it was OK.”

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

People and their family members (where appropriate) had access to a written care plan and an App where care call information could be accessed. A relative told us, “We had a review quite recently it was called a care plan review. It was updated and we got a new copy. We went through everything.”

The manager recognised the importance of clear communication and providing information that people understood. They told us people’s communication needs were considered at the point of their initial assessment. They said, “When we do the initial assessment if they want the care plan in the language they speak, we can do this.” Staff ensured relatives had opportunities to share information with them about their family members so that the care provided continued to be safe and appropriate. Agreed methods of communication and interventions were recorded in people’s care plans.

The provider shared information to enable people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff involved people in decisions about their care.

Relatives told us staff listened to them and ensured they were involved in people’s care as and when appropriate. One relative told us how staff managed mealtimes to ensure their family member had food they liked. They told us, “They (carers) give [Name] a choice of sweet dishes and they will turn their face or nod (to indicate what they want). They do give [Name] a choice. The carers encourage [Name] a lot and never force them. They ask [Name] and respect them. If they say no, then they won’t do that.”

Another relative told us, “The carers read the plan and have it on their App and know what to do and record. They talked (at the assessment) about personal care, risk of sores and skin care and how to handle and move [Name] such as using the hoist. They also discussed nutrition and hydration. There were plenty of risk assessments including medication. It was very thorough.”

Care plans were developed with people and their family members (as appropriate) and were regularly reviewed to ensure the care planned continued to meet people’s needs and wishes. Staff told us they used care plans to ensure they supported people how they wished.

The manager told us a complaints procedure was made available to people in a service user guide should people or their relatives wish to formally raise a concern. Relatives felt confident that if they did wish to complain, they had a contact number for the manager and they would listen.

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

People’s needs were assessed to identify who required adaptations to support their access to all areas of their home and the local community. People had access to external health professionals to promote and maintain their wellbeing and staff supported people in arranging appointments if needed.

Relatives told us they were able to contact the office if they needed any support in relation to the care of their family member. One relative told us, “They answer straight away and put it all in the system. They will call me back straight away. I also speak to the care co-ordinator if I need to.”

Staff and management staff actively listened to information about people who were most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

People and their relatives described positive experiences because they were confident their views and opinions were listened to. Where a need was identified through feedback, appropriate action was taken to support people.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future.

People’s care plans we reviewed were not at end of life. However, important choices people had made were considered and included, for example, whether they needed intervention in the event of a cardiac emergency.

People had family members involved in their care. This was clearly recorded so when important decisions were required, people had family members who could be consulted.