Kennores Healthcare Recruitment Limited

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 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.

People received consistent person‑centred support from staff. Staff demonstrate a clear understanding of each person’s history, communication style, and what matters most to them. One staff member told us, “We have the care plan, and it is always updated. We all have access to read it. If something changes, I read it on the care plan because they are always 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.

Staff worked effectively with other healthcare services and local authorities to make sure people received the right care and support at the right time. This included escalating concerns promptly and making referrals to other professionals or services when needed.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. For example, where a person required larger print due to a visual impairment, their care plan was provided in a larger font to support accessibility. Where people spoke a different language, the provider stated they use an interpreter to ensure information was understood and communication remained clear and safe.

However, some people and relatives told us there were occasional difficulties with language and communication during visits, which at times affected their understanding of the care being delivered. We also saw evidence that the provider was taking action to improve this.

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.

Although no complaints had been received, there were processes in place for people to provide feedback and be listened to. People were sent surveys, and feedback gathered was reviewed and acted upon. Staff had regular meetings where they were able to contribute their views and be involved in discussions about the service. However, there were no staff surveys in place, which meant staff did not have an anonymous method of providing feedback. Staff did tell us they felt able to speak up about any concerns they had.

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

There were effective systems in place to support people’s access to care. The service had an equality and diversity policy, and staff completed a varied training programme designed to meet people’s differing needs. This included specialist training such as dementia awareness and training to support people with learning disabilities.

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 and the registered manager understood their responsibilities to ensure people were treated equally and without prejudice or discrimination. Training and policies in human rights and safeguarding helped staff support people fairly and protect them from abuse and harm.

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.

End of life (EOL) care planning was offered to all people using the service. Some people chose not to complete an EOL care plan, and this choice was respected. Where applicable, Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR) decisions were in place and recorded appropriately.

The provider offered online EOL training to staff to help ensure they understood how to support people sensitively and in line with their wishes at the end of life.