Grays Riverside

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 75 (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.
Family feedback indicated that staff provided personalised, respectful care. One family member told us, “Staff get on [person’s] level, they just show respect.” They also explained how the registered manager and staff involved younger family members in an appropriate and supportive way. Staff recognised the importance of those closest to the person and encouraged their involvement where this promoted reassurance, engagement and wellbeing. They also took time to explain care and clinical interventions, helping younger family members understand the support being provided.
The care plan reviewed was person-centred, detailing the individual's goals, likes, dislikes, and their full 24-hour daily routine within the family home. A family member said, “The care plan reads like [service user]. You can read it and know them. Anyone could read it and support them safely. It’s very thorough.”
 

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. The person was also supported by other care services. The registered manager explained how this was coordinated and described systems in place to support collaborative care. This included ensuring detailed handovers were completed to maintain continuity and provide joined-up support.
Feedback confirmed there was a consistency among the staff team. A relative also told us, "If they take on a new member of staff, they will bring them to meet me and [person]. I have to agree to the staff." This demonstrated how the service involved relatives in decisions about care and staffing, helping to ensure continuity of support and that staff were well matched to people's individual needs and preferences.
 

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. The registered manager explained information could be adapted, for example using large text or easy-read formats. Care plans and assessments also included pictures, such as showing how equipment should be set up, to support people who find visual prompts easier to follow.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. The registered manager kept a record of all complaints, including actions taken and any themes and learning identified. A relative told us they felt confident raising concerns. They said they felt listened to and taken seriously, and explained when they had shared feedback previously, the registered manager had responded appropriately and made changes when needed.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. The person using the service had access to the care, treatment and support in a way that worked for them and their family. The persons care plans detailed what reasonable adjustments were needed to support the person to have access to services.
Family feedback indicated that staff were responsive and punctual. One comment included, “Sometimes they [staff] actually stay over the allocated time. If [person] needs support, they’ll stay and give that support.”
 

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. We received no feedback to suggest there were any concerns regarding discrimination, inequality, or unfair treatment within the service.

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. Where appropriate, the views of representatives, such as family members, were considered. These wishes and decisions were reflected in personalised care plans.