JS Care 4 All 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 inspection 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 did not always make sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they did not always work in partnership with people, to decide how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs. People’s care plans did not consistently contain personalised guidance. Care plans and risk assessments were largely task-focused and did not always provide sufficient detail to ensure care was person-centred. For example, one person’s nutrition and hydration care plan had information missing, including incomplete wording in relation to how to support them. This meant staff may not have had clear guidance to deliver care in a way that fully met the person’s needs. Without detailed and personalised information, there was a risk that care may not be delivered in a person-centred way, which could impact the person’s independence and wellbeing. In addition, risk assessments were not always personalised and lacked sufficient detail to guide staff practice. For example, a fall risk inspection did not include clear instructions on what actions to take in the event of a fall or who should be contacted. Despite this, staff told us they had the information they needed to provide safe and effective care.

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 had a positive relationship with staff and had access to services when needed. Staff told us people were supported to access to healthcare services when required. Daily records were completed during care visits to help ensure continuity of care and support effective communication between staff. The registered manager told us the provider aimed to provide continuity by, where possible, allocating the same care staff to people to support relationship building and consistency of care provision.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. Information about how each person communicated was clearly recorded in their care plans. We were assured this service met the requirements of the Accessible Information Standard (AIS). The AIS isa law to make sure that people who have a disability, impairment or sensory loss receive information they can easily read or understand. The registered manager told us that were people required information in alternative formats; this could be provided in line with people’s needs.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. They involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result. People told us they felt involved in their care and support, whether working directly with the provider or with their regular care staff. People we spoke to, said they felt comfortable raising any concerns with the registered manager or staff. People and their relatives understood how to make a formal complaint if needed and were confident the registered manager would respond appropriately. Systems were in place to encourage and support people to share feedback about the care they received, helping to ensure their view were listened to and acted upon.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.Support and care were available when people when required. Care and support were agreed with people prior to care being started. The management team regularly reviewed care packages to ensure people had access to the care and support they needed. An on-call system was in place to provide access to the support in the event of an emergency.

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. People and their relatives said they were treated fairly and their rights were respected. Staff had access to clear processes for raising concerns about any discriminatory practice or treatment. Training, guidance, and spot checks helped ensure staff were regularly reminded of their responsibilities in relation to equality and diversity. Policies and procedures guided working practices within the provider and were supported by staff training and ongoing monitoring.

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 were not supported to plan for important life changes, which meant they did not always have sufficient time or guidance to make informed decisions about their future, including end of their life care. Following feedback from this inspection, the registered manager put plans in place to introduce processes to address this going forward.