Elmbridge

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 of the service. We have rated this key question 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.

People received personalised care which met their needs and reflected their preferences. Relatives told us the provider assigned staff who possessed the skills and attributes to meet their family members’ needs well. One relative said, “We asked them to find a particular sort of person. We asked them for someone like [a previous care worker], someone kind and gentle. I have been impressed with them because they gave us what they asked for. They responded to that very well.”

Comments on a recent customer satisfaction survey indicated people receiving care and their relatives felt staff had the professional skills and personal qualities needed to provide good care. Comments included, 'Carers are professional and have people skills', ‘Staff/carers are generally very warm and caring', and 'From the interactions I have seen, they are very caring and sensitive towards an individual in cognitive decline.'

Staff told us they received enough information about people’s needs before they began to support them. One member of staff said, “There is an assessment by the manager after which she informs us what to expect and allows questions for clarification. The care plan is drawn up, and we have to show we have read it before we log in to the care planner.” Another member of staff told us, “We have comprehensive information from the careplanwhich guides us on how to support them.”

The provider understood people’s diverse health and care needs, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

People told us they were supported by a consistent team of staff who understood their needs and preferences about their care. One person said, "I see about 4 different girls; they all know how I like things done."

Relatives confirmed their family members received their care from staff who knew their needs well. One relative told us, “There is a group of ladies who have been consistent for quite a while. I have met all of them; they are all very good. I ask [family member] how she feels and she is very happy. They do all the things she needs.”

Comments in a recent customer satisfaction survey distributed by the provider highlighted the benefits of consistent care. One respondent commented, 'It is helpful to have consistency and enhances relationships.'

People had access to appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to their individual needs. The provider information return (PIR) set out how the provider met the Accessible Information Standard (AIS), stating, ‘If it was identified at the initial assessment the client did experience any type of sensory impairment, with additional communication needs, we would always adapt our written and non-written information into an accessible format for them.’ The PIR is information that providers send CQC about their service annually. The AIS sets out how providers should ensure disabled people and people with sensory impairments have access to information in formats that are accessible to them.

People had access to the information they needed about their care and support. People told us it was important for them to know in advance which member of staff would be providing their care. They said the provider ensured this information was provided. One person told us, “They send me the rota in advance by email and [care worker] brings a paper version. It is helpful to have that.” Another person said, “We like to know who is coming and we get a sheet at the end of the week before that tells us."

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas or raise complaints about their care and support. People told us having staff on site at all times meant they could give feedback about their support whenever they needed to. One person said, “They are based here so I can always speak to them. They are very helpful; they go out of their way to assist where they can."

The provider had a complaints procedure which set out how any complaints would be managed. None of the people we spoke with had complained but all said they would feel comfortable doing so. A relative told us, “We have never needed to complain but I would certainly let them know if I was not happy with something. I have every confidence it would be taken seriously.”

The provider had recently carried out a customer satisfaction survey, which they told us would be distributed annually. The registered manager provided examples of actions taken in response to suggestions made in surveys.

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

Leaders were alert to discrimination and inequality that could disadvantage people in accessing care and support. The provider used feedback to improve access for people more likely to experience barriers or delays in accessing care. For example, one person told us a healthcare professional had recommended they change the time of their visits as this would better meet their needs. The person said they had raised this with the provider, who had amended their visit schedule as requested.

People’s care and support promoted equality, removed barriers and protected their rights. People’s experiences were listened to and acted on to improve care. The provider complied with legal equality and human rights requirements, including avoiding discrimination and having regard to the needs of people with different protected characteristics.

Relatives told us the provider adapted their family members’ care to ensure they experienced the outcomes they needed. One relative said they had initially arranged short visits for their family member but it had become apparent that these were not sufficient to ensure all their family member’s needs were met. The relative told us the service had extended the visit times at their request and advised the length of visits could be shortened or extended according to their family member’s needs.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they would have enough time to make informed decisions about their future. People had opportunities to discuss and record their wishes about the support they would need towards the end of their lives if they chose.

Relatives told us they were able to contribute their views when their family members’ care was being planned and reviewed. They said staff were receptive to ideas and suggestions they had about their family members’ care and support.