Heart Of Hope Care Ltd - Cumberland

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.

People were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with staff and other healthcare professionals involved in their care, how to respond to their immediate and changing needs.

People were involved at all stages, from the initial assessment through to care plan decisions and outcome reviews. People we spoke with knew the content of their care plan, confirmed staff respected their preferences and were responsive to their individual needs.

Care plans took into account immediate needs, personal goals and objectives. Staff respected people’s choices, decisions and matters of importance to them, even when this coincided with their allocated care appointment.

One person told us, “They work at my pace, and I can choose what I want to do.”

A healthcare professional reported, “Carers I have worked with have been excellent and are able to build great repartee with people,” demonstrating their ability to adapt their approach to each individual.

Staff understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities. Staff supported people to ensure their care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

The provider developed staff rotas to support continuity and meet people’s preferences with particular staff members. This allowed staff to build trusting and therapeutic relationships with people to uncover their needs and support the delivery of person-centred care.

Staff worked with healthcare colleagues and specialist practitioners to ensure care provision was integrated and met the needs of people they cared for in a seamless way. Staff developed working relationships with external colleagues to support holistic care provision.

One healthcare professional reported, “We have never had any cause for concerns, they were always engaging with the patient and anything we requested of them.” This joint working supported integration and continuity for people.

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

People could access their care plan and associated information via an application on staff devices and staff ensured they answered any questions or concerns at the time. People were also involved with care reviews where information could be shared.

The provider had large font and easy-read documents available to people who would prefer information in a more accessible format. This included the “Service user guide”, complaints information and detail around certain aspects of care and treatment.

The provider did not routinely provide documents in alternative languages however confirmed such information could be obtained with support of their multi-lingual staff or from external sources.

The provider had a process to gather feedback from people.

Staff listened to and involved people at all times, and this was formally recorded in care reviews, on ‘spot-check’ visits, from compliments, complaints or incidents and during general day-to-day care interactions.

People told us they could speak to the registered manager by phone or text, and feedback reviews were recorded on their electronic care planning system.

The registered manager also held discussions with people as part of their “Service user review” which allowed people to speak about all aspects of their care. For example, “Is the service you receive safe?”, “Is your dignity and privacy upheld?”, and “Is the service meeting your personal outcomes?”

Staff involved people and were led by them in decisions about their care, treatment and support. Where recommendations or changes were made, these were discussed with people and their agreement sought.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment in a timely manner in accordance with their needs and requests.

Staff were flexible in their approach to personal requests and timings of visits including out-of-hours and overnight care packages. Managerial support was available to people at all times and there was a dedicated contact number for people to use.

Key contact information was recorded in people’s care plan which enabled staff to speak to the right people at the right time.

Staff supported people to lead on all aspects of their care and to maintain independence which promoted ownership and equity. People accessed care and specialist support services without difficulty or obstruction.

The registered manager actively listened and recorded information about people who were referred into the service to ensure they could meet their complete care and support needs and prevent any inequity.

Staff agreed a bespoke package of care tailored to people’s support and treatment needs, taking into account their background, protected characteristics and any disabilities. This ensured people did not experience a ‘one shoe fits all’ service which may lead to inequality in experience and outcomes. One healthcare professional told us, “They have always been accurate in what they can offer, and they have always honoured such offers.”

Care plans recorded key information about people including sexuality, care preferences and where reasonable adjustments were required, to ensure people’s needs were met in a safe manner.

Each person had an individual and person-centred plan of care, staff had a good understanding of people’s needs and were respectful of their rights, choices and decision making.

Staff were trained in equality and diversity and there were no concerns raised by people about discrimination within the service.

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.

Two people commented how they had not had any discussions about future plans or care at the end-of-life, however staff were mindful of individual sensitivities and potential changes in care needs due to the progression of underlying conditions.

There was evidence in care plans where staff had recorded potential medical and psychological needs associated with deterioration or emergencies, however there was limited detail about how best to support people, their vulnerabilities and note what was important to them when they were approaching end-of-life.

The provider had developed end-of-life information for people and staff had completed training in palliative and end-of-life care.