1st Central Care 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 assessment for this service. This key question has been rated requires improvement.

This meant people’s needs were not always met.

This service scored 61 (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. We found that peoples care and support plans were not always person centred and detailed.

We sampled 3 peoples care plans and found issues such as no life history or preferences being detailed.

In one person’s psychological care plan there was no detail on what care staff should look out for or how to support in the instance of decline. The person’s mood was listed as ‘normal for them’.

Another person’s care plan asked the question ‘is weight stable’ the inputted response was ‘Don’t know’, no risk management or plan of action recorded.

These instances left people exposed to risk, failing to consider their individual circumstances or personalised care needs.

There were some shortfalls in how the provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was not always joined-up, flexible or supportive of choice and continuity.

Some improvements were needed in ensuring all people’s health and care needs were documented in people’s plans of care. Whilst the provider was able to share examples with us of healthcare partnership working, information to evidence this was not readily available in people’s care plans.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information. We saw evidence of positive example of information sharing with other parties involved in care.

People also told us that they had information shared with them and that it was a positive experience. Comments we received included, “[Staff member] came round and ran through everything with us.” Another told us, “[Registered manager came round and set the care up, their care has changed during the past months, and we talk to [Registered manager] and he sorted things, he's easy to talk with and very sociable.”

The provider did not always make it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support.

We found that while the service did have some systems in place to capture feedback, they did not conduct audits of feedback received. As a result, the service was unable to evidence a consistent improvement, how lessons were learnt and how feedback was used to improve outcomes for those using the service.

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

The provider and staff promoted people’s equal access to care services, avoiding discrimination based on protected characteristics.

Staff and leaders did not always actively listen to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality. This meant people’s care was not always tailored in response to this.

The providers training records showed that a 25 minute, in person equality and diversity training session was completed by all staff.

Whilst staff demonstrated they valued and respected the people they supported, they may benefit from awareness training in the Human Rights Act 1998, the Equalities Act 2010 and the Mental Health Act 1983 which would further guide staff in supporting and enabling equity in people’s experience and outcomes.

Overall, people and relatives were positive about staff. However, when we asked people if they felt that staff were able to support them effectively, 1 person told us, “It varies. Some do a good job, others can’t understand English, and I have no confidence in them. A couple of carers come in, but don’t interact with [person] at all, they seem to blank him. Some have never been here before, and I have to tell them what to do, I'm more like a matron here!” This impacted their experience of the service and outcomes.

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.

We saw evidence that the service worked not only with people but with other services to ensure that plans for the future were made. Working closely with hospice services and families was evident. The provider could make improvements to filing and information storage to enable faster and more effective sharing of information with people and partner agencies.