Satash Community Care Project 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.

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 were supported to live meaningful lives based on what mattered to them, including accessing community activities, maintaining relationships and enjoying culturally meaningful food and events. Staff promoted independence by supporting individuals to take part in daily living tasks such as cooking, shopping and household activities. The registered manager told us, “Some like to help in the kitchen. They chop and mix. They all really enjoyed homemade fish cakes recently. There is a picture board of the menus. They develop the menu themselves.” A member of staff also told us, “The food, there’s lots of variety and choices. They make the menu every week. We introduce them to new foods. We get inspiration from YouTube together with them and watch Saturday Kitchen. They love going food shopping every Tuesday and Friday. They check the fridge and cupboards and make a list. Everyone adds on to it.”

Staff consistently recognised and celebrated people’s achievements, no matter how small. As a result, people received highly personalised support that promoted choice, dignity, independence and a strong sense of confidence and belonging.

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.

Continuity of care was maintained through consistent staffing, detailed care planning and effective communication. Staff advocated strongly for people, ensuring external services understood and met their needs and that support remained consistent, even during periods of change.

Overall, people benefited from a highly coordinated approach where healthcare, social support and meaningful activities were fully integrated, resulting in improved wellbeing, stability and an enhanced quality of life.

The service supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. Information about how a person communicated was detailed in people’s care plans and risk assessments. People’s communication needs were met and reviewed to support their care and treatment in line with the Accessible Information Standard (AIS). The Accessible Information Standard tells organisations what they have to do to help ensure people with a disability or sensory loss, and in some circumstances, their carers, get information in a way they can understand it. It also says people should get the support they need in relation to communication. This meant information was tailored to people’s individual needs.

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. Relatives told us they felt involved in their family member’s care and were consulted, where appropriate, about decisions affecting them. One relative said, “Communication is always very good.”

The provider had an accessible complaints process, with information available in an easy read format. Regular meetings were held with people, tailored to their individual communication needs, to encourage meaningful involvement in decisions about the service. Records showed discussion covered topics including activities, holidays, events, the home environment and food and drink. People’s feedback was listened to and used to influence how the service was developed. One person told us, “If I had a complaint I’d speak to [team leader].” Another person said, “If I had a complaint I’d tell [nominated individual].” A relative said, "If I had a complaint, I would go to registered manager first of all, but we haven't had any reason to do that, [relative's] been there 18 years now, we've never had any complaints."

The provider ensured people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. The service demonstrated good practice in ensuring equitable access to care, support and opportunities. Staff provided personalised support to remove barriers, reduce anxiety and enable people to access services and activities that enhanced their wellbeing, independence and quality of life.

People were supported to access healthcare, education and community opportunities in ways that met their individual needs. They were encouraged to take part in meaningful activities of their choice, including shopping, music classes and holidays. Where people were unable to access services in the community, staff arranged for healthcare professionals to visit them at home, ensuring they received timely care in a familiar environment. This personalised approach enabled people to access opportunities, maintain their wellbeing and live fulfilling, inclusive lives.

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 knew people well and understood their individual needs and preferences. Relatives confirmed people were treated with dignity and respect, and care plans clearly recorded people’s belief’s, preferences and individual needs.

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 service had given people and their relatives every opportunity to express their wishes. Staff understood how to support people at the end of their life and the importance to meet their wishes and preferences. A relative told us, “We talk about it regularly. Between me, [nominated individual] and the registered manager, we know [relative] doesn’t want to go into a hospice or a hospital, we have put the plan into place. We want to give [relative] a dignified death.”