Restore7 Ltd

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 68 (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. Staff provided person-centred care which reflected people’s needs and choices. Relatives told us they were happy with the care their family member received. People and their relatives were involved in planning and reviewing their care and had ongoing communication with the registered manager about their needs. A relative told us, “They adapt the care to optimise [person’s] experience. It’s very good.”

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’s care and support was planned and delivered in line with their individual needs and preferences for how and when this should be provided. Staff understood the diverse needs of people using the service and made sure the care and support they provided was in line with people’s individual needs and preferences. The service worked with others to ensure people received appropriate care and support from everyone involved in their care.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information however, it was not always tailored to individual needs. Although staff were aware of people’s communication needs and gave examples of how they provided information in a way they understood there was no other formats available. Where possible the provider would ensure staff spoke the same language as the person and gave examples of how this was achieved. Following the assessment, the provider has listened to feedback and has taken action to address shortfalls.

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.

There was a complaints procedure in place that people and their relatives were aware of. People and their relatives had regular meetings with the registered manager and staff. Relatives told us they felt able to raise concerns and the provider would respond appropriately.

The provider offered satisfaction surveys to staff, people and their relatives about their experiences.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. People received care at the times of their choosing, by a regular team of staff. The service was flexible and accommodated changes to timings of care calls when people wanted. The registered manager undertook regular assessments, monitoring and reviews of people’s care needs and used information about people’s choices and preferences to make sure care visits were scheduled at the times people needed.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who were most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this. The provider made reasonable adjustments to adapt the care they provided to meet people’s individual needs. Care records evidenced the provider maintained strong links with other professionals so they could access support and advice on how to minimise potential obstacles people faced due to their disability.

Relatives told us the provider focused on positive experiences and outcomes for individuals. Staff worked with people to identify barriers people experienced. The registered manager gave examples of how they provided support to one person so they could attend a local community activity to reduce the risk of them becoming isolated.

Care plans were person-centered and tailored to people's individual needs and wishes.

People were not always 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. Care plans lacked information about peoples end of life wishes and although training was offered, staff had not completed any training in end of life care. There was an end of life policy in place. Following the assessment, the provider has listened to feedback and has taken action to address shortfalls.