Premier Care Services

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.

People had a personalised care plan which provided staff with a detailed overview of people’s needs. These had been regularly reviewed and updated if there had been changes.

Staff gave us examples of how they had provided people with person-centred care. One staff member said, “People rely on us, we help people with medication, support to eat and make sure people are ok. You become a friend, you chat with them and put a smile on their face.”

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 service was small with a team of permanent staff. This meant people had a core group of care staff providing a consistent service. People’s care records contained details of contingency planning. This provided details on the arrangements of what would happen in the event of extreme weather, if staff were not able to get to the person.

There had been no missed visits and people said staff were generally on time. People said they found the service to be reliable which provided them with reassurance. Comments from people and relatives included, “They are reliable, we always know they [staff] are going to be there and the care worker is very good” and “I can trust them to come when they say they will. It’s just nice to have them come, we have a chat as well as being looked after.”

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

People’s communication needs were assessed and details recorded on how to communicate with people. For example, if people were hard of hearing, this was recorded with information on how to support the person. For one person, staff were instructed to encourage them to write things down. This helped the person remember important events.

The provider made sure people had information in formats that were suitable to meet their needs. For example, if people needed a larger font this could be provided.

People were given a service user guide. This outlined what people needed to know about the service such as confidentiality, privacy and how the service planned people’s care.

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.

The provider had a complaints process. Whilst the service had not received any formal complaints, all concerns were recorded. The provider took action to address concerns and kept a record of outcomes. People and relatives said leaders were very responsive to any suggestions for improvements. Comments included, “If I phone [registered manager] with any concerns we have a very good rapport”, “I can get someone quickly and action is taken” and “I always get a good response, I don’t need to call often.”

The provider completed regular monitoring visits. Leaders visited people and made sure they were happy with the service and their care workers.

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

Leaders understood equality and diversity and how people may be subject to discrimination. They had policies which provided staff with guidance on promoting people’s rights and working in an inclusive way. Some people faced barriers as they were not able to attend health appointments due to difficulties with transport. Leaders organised for staff to escort people to their appointments, making sure they had the required transport. This was provided at times with no additional cost for the person.

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.

Leaders were aware of ways in which people may face discrimination. They had policies and procedures to make sure people’s rights were promoted. Staff were trained on equality and diversity and inclusive ways of working.

The service used an electronic care planning system. If people were not able to use technology to read their care records, the service provided people with paper copies.

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.

There was no end-of-life care being provided at the time of this assessment. However, if people had specific wishes this was recorded. For example, if people had made decisions about resuscitation, this was recorded in their care records and staff informed where any key documents were stored.