Richmoe Healthcare

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 the provider met people’s needs. This is the first assessment for this 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. They were working towards improving care plans to ensure they fully documented the specific support people needed.

People told us they participated in planning and reviewing their care. They said they had copies of their care plan and could access care records via the provider’s electronic care planning system.

People’s care plans included details about their preferred routines for personal care. The registered manager had recognised where some care plans could be improved to include more specific details about how staff should support people. For example, where people were assessed as needing 2 staff, instructions outlining each staff member’s role could be clearer. Care plans often stated the tasks required, but some lacked detail about how these should be completed. However, people said staff had developed a good working knowledge of their needs and routines and completed tasks set out in their care plans to a good standard. The registered manager was in the process of updating care plans at the time of our inspection. We saw examples of updated care plans that were more detailed and clearer about how staff should support people.

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 told us that, apart from occasional fluctuations in timings and rota changes, their care was consistent. They said although not all staff were as familiar with their needs as others, they felt confident in raising any issues with the provider, who addressed their concerns. The registered manager demonstrated how they promoted consistency and continuity by developing small teams of staff who had received training specific to each individual’s needs.

The provider had effective systems to minimise the impact of unplanned changes to care, such as staff sickness. They ensured all senior staff were trained and completed care calls where needed to prevent delays in people receiving care.

Senior staff completed weekly audits of completed care records to assess the continuity of care. These audits reviewed whether visits took place at planned times and lasted for the expected duration. We saw evidence of recent audits which showed good levels of consistency in people’s care. Where care was delivered outside of what was expected, senior staff investigated to identify causes and reduce the likelihood of recurrence. This helped to give the provider assurance that people were receiving consistent and reliable care.

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

The registered manager had a good understanding of the Accessible Information Standard, and ensured information was given to people in a format they understood. For example, when required, people were provided service user guides and care rotas in large print, to meet their communication needs. All required adjustments were documented within people's care plans, which helped to ensure there were consistent communication strategies adopted.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas or raise complaints about their care and support. The provider involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

People told us the provider was responsive to their feedback and took action to address concerns when they were raised. For example, one person explained how they experienced an issue with a staff member, which the registered manager investigated and resolved.

The registered manager reviewed complaints to identify trends and areas for improvement. These reviews highlighted isolated issues around punctuality, consistency, and staff familiarity with individuals’ needs. Records reflected that actions had been taken to address individual concerns and any relevant learning was shared with staff. This demonstrated that responsive action was taken in reaction to this feedback.

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

The provider completed pro-active work to ensure people had access to healthcare services. For example, staff worked closely with one person to overcome barriers to accessing opticians, dental services, and GP appointments. Although the person had previously been unable or reluctant to engage with these services, consistent support and encouragement from staff enabled them to access the health input they required. Staff had received training in equality and diversity. One staff member told us, “The training focuses on protected characteristics and how things like our unconscious bias can affect the way we provide care. It makes us think about how we should value each person as an individual.”

People’s care plans included details around people’s protected characteristics and how to ensure care was not a barrier to people receiving fair treatment. Senior staff demonstrated awareness of the need to respond promptly where care packages or levels of support needed to change, helping reduce delays to ensure people receive appropriate care. For example, where people were suffering from social isolation, the provider helped to ensure people were given access support services to improve community access.

At the time of our inspection, nobody at the service was receiving end of life care. However, as part of the assessment process, senior staff enquired about people’s future wishes and whether they had made any advanced decisions about their care. This helped to ensure the provider was prepared should people’s needs change and they required end of life care.