Ability Healthcare Cannock Ltd

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.People told us staff were able to support them in the way they preferred. Relatives also felt people received person-centred care. A relative told us, “There were lots of questions the provider asked so that they could get [person’s name] care right. They do meals for them and they offer choices. They went downhill rapidly a few years ago but have improved since this provider has been going to see them.” Staff could describe the individual preferences of the people they supported. The care plans were written to describe people’s preferences and had been developed with people and those important to them. Reviews were carried out when needs changed or every 6 months.

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 and their relatives told us the provider worked with other professionals when needed to support them. Partners told us the provider worked well with them. A partner told us, “We have a good working relationship with Ability, and they advise of any issues or concerns they may have.” The registered manager could share examples where they had engaged with other professionals to support people including doctors, district nurses, occupational therapists and social workers to ensure people received the support they needed to maintain their independence in the community.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. People and their relatives told us staff communicated well with them. A person told us, “I can communicate well with them all.” A relative told us, “[Person’s name] can communicate well with their staff and seems to know them well now.” Staff told us the care plans people had in place guided them on how to communicate effectively with people. The registered manager told us communication needs were assessed and these informed peoples individual care plans, records we saw supported this.

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 and their relatives told us they understood how to make a complaint and would feel confident this would be addressed, however everyone said there had not been any need to raise any concerns or complaints. A person told us, “I have not had to complain about anything but if I did, I would just call the office and feel confident that they would help.” A relative told us, “I have filled in 2 feedback forms in the last 10 months which is good and they also do spot checks regularly and let us know what is happening and keep us in the picture. They are just all so amicable, and I have never had to complain about anything.” The provider had a complaints policy in place, and the registered manager could describe how they would investigate and respond to any concerns received.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. The provider had an equality and diversity policy in place to ensure people had equity in access to the service. The registered manager told us the assessment and care plan considered individual protected characteristics and gave guidance to staff on how to meet these. Staff told us they understood individual needs and records we saw supported this.

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. The provider had systems in place to ensure people had care and support which was tailored to their individual needs. For example, people were provided with staff who spoke their first language wherever possible and translation systems were also in use. Where peoples religious or cultural needs meant they required a specific diet, staff understood how to support with this.

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. People received end of life care in line with their specific needs, wishes and preferences. The registered manager told us they used their care planning system to identify all the individual’s needs and preferences. Staff had received training in end-of-life care and could describe how people were supported. The registered manager told us they were introducing a system as part of individual reviews to capture people’s future wishes where they wanted to discuss and document their plans.