Shelagh Care Services 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 newly 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 service made sure people were always at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in need. Care plans and risk assessments were regularly reviewed with people to ensure they remained relevant to preferences and wishes for care. Staff told us they knew people well and had access to all the information they needed to provide support to them. We received positive comments on people’s care experience.

The service understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity. A relative told us they were receiving care from the same regular staff, so they received continuity of care. Staff confirmed they had a regular working pattern, and they were supporting people they knew well. A relative told us, “We usually have the same carers coming in unless someone is on leave. Consistency is important for [relative], so they are aware of who is coming each day.”

The service supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. People, their relatives and staff were provided with information which was accessible, safe and secure and supported their rights and choices. Systems were in place which enabled people to either receive information about the service or have their information in accessible formats should they so wish. Management and staff we spoke with told us information for people could be supplied in their preferred format as and when required.

A relative told us, “We have a care plan in the house and all other information we need.”

The service 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.

Staff were able to support people to give feedback on the care they received, or people could give feedback independently and anonymously if they wished.

The registered manager gathered feedback from people and relatives in a number of ways, through telephone calls, surveys, emails, face to face meetings and paper-based surveys. The registered manager analysed the responses for themes and trends to see where improvements were needed and where compliments had been received, these were passed on to staff.

The service made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. Relatives told us their loved ones had access to all the services they needed. The registered manager told us regular meetings were held with all staff to ensure appropriate referrals were made in a timely way when needed.

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. Relatives told us their loved ones were supported to access the healthcare they needed such as visits from the GP practice, district nurses and palliative care team.

Staff confirmed they had completed training in equality and diversity. Staff were aware of the protected characteristics under the Equality Act acknowledging diversity and valuing differences.

Staff ensured people had access to healthcare to maintain their wellbeing. Where indicated people were supported to attend specialist health appointments for continued monitoring and treatment. The service had developed good relationships with their GP practice and district nurse team.

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. People’s care plans did not include information and discussions around making informed decisions about their end of life wishes. We did see where people had a ‘do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation (DNACPR) order’ in place. Their care plans informed staff or other professionals where it was kept in the event of a medical emergency. Following the inspection, the registered manager told us they would introduce an end of life care plan and complete this collaboratively with people and their relatives.