Manifolds care Also known as Regus

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 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.

Care was planned and delivered in partnership with people, taking into account what mattered to them, their preferences and their views about their care. The provider worked with people to regularly review their needs and responded appropriately to any changes, involving them in decisions about how support should be adapted. This approach helped to ensure people remained actively involved in their care and maintained choice and control over how their care and treatment were delivered. Relatives and representatives told us they were fully involved in people’s care and treatment.

The registered manager attended any reviews with the community outreach team to share information and keep people updated.

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 registered manager worked collaboratively with relevant health and social care professionals to help coordinate care effectively and reduce the risk of gaps in support. This approach enabled care to be flexible and adapted when people’s needs changed, while promoting choice and maintaining people’s independence.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

Care plans included clear guidance on how to communicate with each person, helping staff to deliver care in a way that reflected people’s preferences and communication styles.

The registered manager told us or their provider information return (PIR), “If there was a specific need for information to be provided in a different format i.e. a different language, large print or Braille etc then we would provide this and if we needed to provide an interpreter then we would refer to the appropriate organisation to get this in place.”

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.

Relatives and people’s representatives were very confident any concerns were taken seriously. A representative said, “I have spoken to the manager and if I had any concerns they would deal with it. I have faith in their ability to do this.”

More work was needed to gain people’s feedback and suggestions formerly as only 1 survey was available to view.

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

The service maintained close working relationships with community outreach teams, with clear referral pathways in place. Where people required additional support, the provider sought input from relevant professionals such as occupational therapists and physiotherapists in a timely way.

Where people required input from other specialist services, including district nurses or speech and language therapy (SALT), referrals were made without delay. All referrals and professional involvement were clearly documented on the system, helping to ensure staff and management maintained oversight and people experienced coordinated, joined-up care.

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 completed equality and diversity training and demonstrated an understanding of how to promote people’s rights and reduce discrimination.

Care plans reflected people’s individual needs, preferences and protected characteristics, helping to ensure care was inclusive and respectful.

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.

Whilst no-one using the service was at the end of their life there was minimal information in care plans related to people’s future need for support.