Assessment and Enablement Team

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.

People knew how to give feedback about their care and were able to raise any concerns or issues. People and their family felt confident that any complaints would be listened to and taken seriously.

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.

We did not look at Person-centred Care during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Care provision, Integration and continuity during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Providing Information during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Listening to and involving people during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Equity in access during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

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. One person said, “They come from the office to see me and ask me if things are okay.” A relative commented, “We filled in a form and a couple of people from the team visited to make sure everything was alright.”

People and family members were positive about their experiences using the service and of their support. One person said, “I would not have managed without them.” Another commented, “They are people you can talk to. Sometimes when you have been on your own for a little, it’s nice to see another face and to talk to them. They listen.”

People knew how to make a complaint and had guidance on who to contact if they wanted to raise concerns. One person told us, “I would speak to [staff member] if I had a complaint. I haven’t needed to make a complaint, but I wouldn’t hesitate if anything went wrong.”

Staff told us that people were supported speak up about their care if they were not happy or if they wanted to change something. One staff member said, “In the first 6 weeks we ask for feedback after the first 2 weeks and then at the end of the 6-week period.”

Records confirmed that engaging with people and finding out their views took place in several different ways. Records confirmed there were regular 2 weekly and 6 weekly reviews of people's care and reablement support. Effective communication systems were in place to ensure that staff were kept up to date with any changes to people's care and support systems to staff. They confirmed they had regular staff meetings and 1 to 1 meetings with a senior staff member. There was a complaints procedure in place which had been provided to everyone using the service. The complaints procedure was included in the service user guide encouraging people to share their views on the service.

We did not look at Planning for the future during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.