DORZ Care Services 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 64 (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 records were not always detailed with person-centred information, such as, the persons gender, family relationships, previous occupation and interests. For example, a person’s care records included reference to another person, and for another person there was conflicting information regarding their gender and family relationships. There was an increased risk of inaccurate information being relied upon and potentially shared with people, relatives and stakeholders. However, people and relatives spoke positively about how staff took time to get to know people and respected their choices. Relatives’ comments included, “I think they know my [loved one] now.” And “Loved one is very comfortable with [staff].”

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
continuity. Care plans did not always provide consistent information in relation to people’s needs for example, one person had been assessed with a risk of choking. The lack of care and risk planning increased the risk of them receiving inconsistent support from staff. However, people were supported by a consistent staffing team; the provider had created teams of staff to provide dedicated care to people to enable them to provide support. Health professionals told us how DORZ care services acted promptly when commissioned to support people. One health professional told us, “I have given them several patients and they have been prompt with assessment and start of [support] so they are very reliable especially when most of our patients are on Fast Track and need [support] to start ASAP.”
 

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. The provider ensured documents and information was available to people in a format to suit them. For example, the provider was aware of the requirement to meet the Accessible Information Standard and told us this was considered as part of their assessment before commencing support with people.

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. People’s voices were heard and they could freely make changes to their care and support. The provider and management team periodically visited to gain people’s feedback, they also conducted observations of staff practice which acted as another means of receiving direct feedback. People and relatives told us they knew how to complain and who to complain to. Comments included, “We have a file, it is probably in there. I have not needed to complain.” And, “I have never needed to complain."

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. People had full access to support when needed, there was a 24 hour on call service for emergencies. Discussions with the provider and staff showed they understood how to access specialist health or social care support should this be required

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. The provider and staff made sure people had access to health and social care professional support. They made sure people knew what services were available to them to overcome inequalities and barriers to care. One health professional told us, “They do contact the responsible nurse or Hospice to report any changes or issues and work together to resolve them.”

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. The service was supporting people at the end of their lives. There were shortfalls in the information held by the service as it did not always consider peoples individual wishes to meet any religious or cultural wishes, obligations or who they would like present towards the very end of their lives. The provider was able to detail wishes people may have as to the actions staff should take should resuscitation be required.