Real Life Options - Long Eaton Supported Living and Outreach

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 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.

Changes in people’s needs were identified and acted on. The implemented systems to keep staff informed of changes and share feedback. One professional involved with the service told us, “There has been some excellent work undertaken with a complex client. This included timely use of a specialist team [to support improved outcomes for the person].”

Staff were supported to get to know people well and value them as individuals. One member of staff told us, “The people we support are amazing; the team is amazing. We make a difference for people and want to make even more of a difference.”

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 were supported by staff who were trained and assessed to be competent to meet their individual needs. Appropriate training was provided to develop staff who were able to meet each person’s range of needs safely. Specialist advice was sought were required, for example, district nurse leading delegated health care tasks.

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 met. Staff got to know people well and understood how best to communicate with them.

People’s care plans included details of people’s preferred communication methods which staff followed. We observed positive interactions; staff demonstrated their understanding and skill of implementing individual communication strategies. People were supported to be as comfortable as possible when meeting a new person and to engage with the inspector. One person told us, “I get on well with staff, they listen when I need help. Staff are friendly and talk to me.”

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 implemented systems to gather feedback from stakeholders, including people, their representatives and staff. An annual survey was implemented to capture feedback and lived experiences. This gave the support provider the structure to gather, review, and act on feedback, promoting services to adapt and improve based on what they were told. The provider identified actions to take in response to feedback received and developed a system for sharing these actions and then completed monitoring to demonstrate progress.

One relative told us, “I do not wait to be asked, I provider feedback when I need to. I feel listened to.”

One member of staff told us, “I feel involved. We give and get feedback. We make a difference to people; we always make sure they benefit.” Another member of staff told us, “The management team is good, staff can be open and honest. I feel included and involved, this is a supportive place to [work].”

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

People received person centred care which met their needs, this included flexible care when required. The provider implemented systems to ensure people had timely support available when they needed it. Staff were available to meet peoples planned and responsive needs and requests. For example, where people needed 2 to 1 support, staff were readily available to provide this.

Support systems were accessible to people and staff. People were able to request additional support as required, either independently or with staff support. Staff feedback was consistent in how they were part of a team and never felt on their own as they were confident support was always available to them and the people they supported. One member of staff told us, “I can always call a manager for support, if I am not sure of something, I always get a response.”

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.

People’s protected characteristics were considered in care planning. For example, where people’s support needs varied, guidance for staff was available to support people to achieve consistently good outcomes.

Relevant policies were in place to promote equality, diversity and human rights and staff attended the relevant required training.

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 were supported by people who knew them well in making decisions about how their care was to be provided. Staff considered people’s wellbeing and supported people to talk about and plan future events to the extent they were able and felt comfortable. Some decisions were made in people’s best interests, involving representatives who knew them best.