Arc Care

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 registered service. This key question has been rated good.

This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 71 (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 did not always make sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices. For example, we noted a small number of care plans, risk assessments and daily notes contained the words ‘he’ or ‘she’ which was not in direct relation to the gender identity of the person. This meant the documentation did not always reflect people accurately. When raised with the provider they told us they would review and update the documents.

However, most people and their relatives told us their care plans were reviewed with them regularly. Care plans also had detailed information about people for staff to follow.

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 the service had worked with other care providers and health services on their behalf. Leaders told us about the variety of partners they worked with, and we saw evidence of this through communication and referrals with other partners. Partners provided positive feedback about the way the service provided care, integration and continuity. For example, one partner told us, “I can honestly say, we worked well together to achieve a good outcome for the person.”

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. People we spoke with did not raise any concerns about the information they received from the provider. People told us they had the contact details of the registered manager and the office, and they always responded to in a timely manner. People’s individual communication needs were documented in people’s care plans. For example, one care plan stated, “I need staff to speak up so I can hear them.” One staff member told us, “I supported a person who had hearing impairment and who used a communication board. Carers wrote things down and the person responded verbally to the questions.” Staff were aware of how to observe people’s body language when people could not verbally communicate. The provider had a current Accessible Information Standards (AIS) policy.

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 knew how to raise a concern about the service. Where a concern had been raised by a relative about a staff member the provider responded within the time frames set out in the complaints policy and put interventions in place to prevent the incident from occurring again. The provider had a complaints log and there was evidence noted of actions and any learning outcomes. Audits were being completed of complaints.

People had regular opportunities to provide feedback about their experiences. For example, the provider completed regular telephone calls to people about their experiences and written surveys were sent out annually. The provider also worked in partnership with another agency, and they told us they also completed regular telephone calls to gain people’s feedback. One person told us, “I recently had a questionnaire via WhatsApp from Arc asking if I was happy with everything.”

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. People told us the service was flexible to meet their needs. For example, one person told us, “The timings have changed, and the slots have been moved to accommodate showering in the morning. They say to us if you need to change anything timing wise, they’re quite happy to accommodate that.”

Leaders told us as part of the service they deliver they would pick up any equipment people needed to ensure they got access to it as quickly as possible. We saw evidence of referrals to external partners. One partner told us, “They work really well with partners and understand the referral pathways are there if they need them.” There was also evidence in care plans for staff to ensure a person’s mobility scooter was fully charged before leaving the scheduled call, so the person could access the community when they wanted.

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. For example, one person told us how the service had put in a referral for additional time to complete the required personal care tasks. Leaders and staff were alert to the discrimination and inequality that could disadvantage people using the service and acted when needed. People’s care plans contained current information about people’s wishes in relation to how their social, cultural and spiritual needs should be met.

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. Most people told us the service had discussed with them their plans for the future, but some people told us the service had not. One person told us, “They know what [Person’s] needs are at the moment and that’s what they provide, we don’t need to discuss this at the moment.” We found some staff had gaps in their knowledge in this area but had received training. However, most of the staff we spoke with said they had not supported a person on end of life. Care plans contained information about people’s plans for the future where this had been discussed and agreed with them.