Mach Care Solutions (Birmingham)

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.

At our last assessment we rated this key question Requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to 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 and their relatives told us staff provided person centred care. Specific comments included, “Nothing is ever too much trouble for them” and “My [Family member] loves to spend time chatting with the carers as they are much closer to their age and so relate better. I often hear laughing when they are here.”

Staff were able to explain what person-centred care meant to them. This included the importance of considering the person’s individuality and acknowledging everyone was different, so their care needed to reflect this.

Staff told us they had built positive relationships with people and knew how everyone liked their support to be delivered. They said they had learnt what was important to each person, so ensured their preferences were respected.

There was detailed information within people’s care plans about the support they required. This included the use of any equipment, meal preferences and specific instructions to ensure safety. We saw details in medical risk assessments which considered emotional impact of conditions to the person and how they may want staff to support them with their feelings.

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.

The registered manager and staff team told us they worked closely with a range of other health and social care professionals. This included community nurses, occupational therapists and other support agencies. They told us how they worked in partnership with other services such as district nurses to coordinate call times which enabled people to receive their support with the least amount of disruption.

The agency had two offices which meant staff working in a different area had access to local amenities.

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

The service was transitioning from paper to electronic care planning. The service had also changed their system to enable staff to use more easily.

Staff were able to read any updates any changes to a person’s care plan in a timely manner. However, the service continued to provide a paper format of the care plan in people’s homes unless the person requested them not too. The manager told us they were looking into further training with the system provider which would give people and their loved one’s access to electronic records rather than paper copies.

The registered manager told us they were able to provide information in different font sizes, in audio, easy read or different languages. They said they always discussed the person’s communication needs at the initial assessment and thereafter within care reviews. They said the format of documentation would then be adjusted accordingly.

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 and their relatives told us they were able to give their views about the service. This included informally through conversation or by phone, in care reviews or surveys. Specific comments included “Whenever I have had a worry or concern, I call the office or ask the carer, and they [manager] call me back.” “I am always asked if I am happy with my support, the staff really know me and do things the way I like it.”

We saw evidence of how peoples feedback was collated and fed into improvement plans.

The registered manager told us they knew each person the service supported. They felt this was important so people would be able to talk freely to them if they had a concern. Staff told us they regularly asked people if they were happy with their support. They said any changes requested would be made in a timely manner.

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

Management told us they arranged various appointments for people if asked to do so. This included home visits if people found accessing services difficult.

They said staff were also able to accompany people to appointments if needed. An on-call system was available out of office hours. This enabled people using the service and staff to call if there was a problem or advice was needed.

In the event of an incident, management told us they would support the staff member and join them at the person’s home.

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 had undertaken training in equality, diversity and inclusion and identified everyone as an individual. One staff member said “We treat everyone as an individual and get to know as much about them as possible. Every person is different.”

People’s cultural and religious needs were identified in care planning information. The registered manager told us how they matched care staff wherever possible to people’s preferences and choices. This enabled really positive relationships which was supported by what people receiving the service had told us.

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.

The service had previously provided, and staff had received training in end-of-life care. Staff told us they worked alongside nurses and other support agencies if needed. This ensured the person received the best possible care and were as comfortable and pain free as possible.

Care planning detailed people’s wishes regarding their end-of-life care including where people had advanced statements and DNACPR’s in place. This also included their preference of remaining at home or being admitted to hospital as their health deteriorated.