Archived: Creative Support – Carlisle Services

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.

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. They did not always decide, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs. Care plans were regularly reviewed with input from people, their relatives or advocates, and health and social care professionals. Care plans were person-centred and detailed enough to ensure staff could follow people’s care plans and wishes. However, staff reported that they were not given enough time to read and understand care plans. This meant that care delivery was task focused and not always person-centred.

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. Staff received person-centred care training, and their induction process ensured they were given clear guidance on how to support people and recognise changes to their needs. People had access to community health practitioners, such as, GPs, dentists, opticians and other professionals when needed. Appointments and visits were documented in care records. When agency staff were used the provider tried to ensure that it was regular agency staff on the rota to aid with the continuity of care.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. Care records were accurate, up to date and included information that was appropriate to individual communication needs. Easy read documents or formats were tailored to individual preferences.
 

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.

Other than some communication issues with management, families, healthcare professionals and staff told us communication was good.

People and relatives knew how to raise concerns. Relatives told us that while they had not previously received questionnaires, since the start of the inspection they had been contacted to offer feedback.

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

Staff understood the importance of ensuring people had access to the right health and social care services and helped them to do this through planned and documented care.

Visit times were agreed and aligned to peoples’ preferences however, people, relatives and staff reported staffing was not sufficient. People did not always receive their calls on time in line with planned care or for the correct durations. Gender preferences were respected when raised. The provider had an out of hours process in place and contact details were documented in care plans.

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. The provider ensured staff understood people’s needs, preferences and anxieties. The right processes were in place to enable staff to support people appropriately in reaching positive outcomes. Most people described positive experiences of care, highlighting staff kindness and respect. Relatives said they would recommend the service, and people felt safe and supported.

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 .Although no one was on end-of-life care at the time of our inspection, wishes for this important time of their life had been expressed and documented in care plans. Staff supported people in meetings to communicate or express their wishes. Where this was not possible, appropriate processes were in place to ensure timely decisions were taken.