TLCareServices Limited

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.

This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated 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.

Care plans and daily records, which staff completed when they provided people with care and support, were person centred and demonstrated how people’s individual needs had been met.

Guidance about how staff should support the needs of autistic people required more detail, to better reflect the person’s behaviours and communication styles. However, basic essential information was available to staff and staff we spoke with were able to describe how the person’s behaviours were considered and safely managed.

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 provider told us they tried to ensure each person was supported by a consistent staff team. The relative we spoke with confirmed their family member was supported by an established group of staff who knew them well. Records relating to support calls showed people were supported consistently, by staff who knew them well and understood their needs.

Staff told us the provider shared information about people’s needs with them before they provided care and support. One staff member said, “I have access to care plans before I support people. The manager lets us know if we have a new client, we go through the care plan.”

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

Information about people’s communication needs was included in their care plans. Where people had specific communication needs, including autistic people, care plans included information about nonverbal cues and communication. This included where people used sounds to communicate and pointed to things they wanted to do.

Staff we spoke with were able to explain how they adapted their communication style to meet people’s needs. This included being aware of the tone of their voice and remaining calm when communicating with people. One staff member said, “I am calm and approachable. I create time and am patient, otherwise you can agitate people.” Another staff member told us they had been matched with a person as they both spoke the same language.

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 relative we spoke with knew how to raise concerns about the care provided. They told us, “We give feedback, if we were concerned, I could speak to [name of provider]. I have done in the past but there's no need to at the moment.”

The provider sought feedback from people regularly, and where changes or improvements were needed, they took action to improve people’s experience of care. Staff we spoke with were aware of the provider’s process for the management of complaints and demonstrated an understanding of how to escalate any concerns shared with them.

There was a system in place for the management of complaints and records showed the provider had acted professionally when responding to concerns and taken learning from incidents and events.

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

No concerns were raised with us about people’s access to the service and the provider actively supported the involvement of health and social care professionals in people’s care and support.Where required the provider had advocated for people to ensure their care and support met their needs. For example, by contacting health professionals on their behalf.

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.

Staff demonstrated a good understanding of how people’s support needs could lead to them experiencing inequalities in daily life. Care plans included information about how people’s health needs, or disabilities, could result in them experiencing barriers to everyday experiences.

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.

The provider was not supporting anyone at the time of the inspection who was in receipt of end-of-life care. However, some staff had undertaken training in supporting people who were at the end of their lives. In terms of important life changes there was no-one who had recently experienced this. However, the provider was experienced in social care and knew how to support people with any significant changes and recognised the need to involve relevant professionals as required.