Elm Case Management 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.

This is the first assessment for this previously unrated 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 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.

The service was designed to be flexible to support each person as an individual. Where changes had to be made to accommodate the changing needs of the person, or where staff sickness prevented a staff member providing support, the service acted to keep the person and their relatives informed and ensure support continued to be provided.

The service always respected people’s personal preferences. People were offered genuine choice about who supported them. Prospective new staff were carefully selected to work with a particular person because they were felt to have interests in common, followed by a thorough introductory process. If the person either did not like their new staff member, or the new relationship was not going well, then the person would be provided with a different staff member to support them. This approach was very effective in forming stable relationships between people, relatives and staff.

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.

Timely referrals had been made to external healthcare professionals to support people with their identified needs. The service engaged the support of a psychologist, as necessary, to deliver people both assessment, regular review and intervention. This meant those people who needed psychological support had this support delivered whenever they needed.

People benefited from a small staff team designed to work well with them, have a meaningful relationship with the person, and to know them well. This helped ensure people received continuity in their care, and changes in their health and wellbeing were continuously monitored and reviewed.

The provider did not always supply, accurate and up-to-date information to the public and service commissioners, or to people and their relatives in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

All providers of publicly funded adult social care must follow the Accessible Information Standard. The service was compliant with this standard, but some improvements were being made.

The service did not provide written information to people either considering the service or when they began to use the service. However, the service is small and highly personalised, and therefore the necessary information, including information about the service and what to expect from it, was shared verbally with the person and their relatives.

The service website had very limited information to inform the public, and potential commissioners of the service, about the nature of the service and what the service could provide. The registered manager said the service had plans to improve the content of their website and develop written information to be given to prospective users of the service, their relatives, and potential commissioners of the service.

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 service had a complaints investigation procedure, and this had been used effectively when necessary. People’s relatives told us they knew how to make a complaint should they need to do so. All complaints were investigated by a company director, although the service had few complaints.

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

People’s care and support was being given in a timely way and in line with the quality standards and legal requirements. The service was enabling full access to care and other services for each person. The service was advocating for access to specialist health services through each person’s GP practice. For example, referrals for outpatient services at the local hospital. The management team knew how to access specialist support. For example, support was being accessed to assess a person’s need for an application for a community Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards authorisation.

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 received training in equality, diversity and human rights so that people did not experience discrimination in the quality of their lives. People’s views were considered and acted upon. Staff and the registered manager advocated for people. People were supported by an individual and personalised service, to ensure they had a good quality of life.

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 a policy and procedure about how the service would support someone who was coming to the end of their life. However, the service mainly supported younger people. The value of their lives was advocated for by the service, and so DNR/CPR advance directives were rarely in place.

The service had recent experience supporting a person who was coming to the end of their life. To ensure the person had all palliative care treatment possible, they moved into acute hospital to end their life. The service’s staff continued to support the person in hospital ensuring that their specific care and emotional needs were well met.