New Support Care 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 newly registered service. This key question has been rated Good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

We have not awarded this service a score for Responsive.

Find out about when we will not publish a key question score and what we look at when we assess Responsive.

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.

We saw care plans contained person centred information. For example, a person’s likes and dislikes were clearly recorded along with how to support the person with their personal care needs in a way they wished and best met their needs.

Staff we spoke to were able to describe people’s preferences and likes. This meant peoples support was centred around their individual needs and preferences.

People we spoke to felt that care was person centred comments included “[Person] can be distressed, carers are very good at adapting to [person’s] mood”.

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 provider had a business continuity plan to ensure that people’s support was continuous during times of emergency such as poor weather.

The registered manager told us they provided flexible support to people, and each person had a designated team of carers to ensure continuity for people. Staff were and committed covering for sickness and holidays so people could have support from staff who they were familiar with. This meant that people’s support was provided by familiar staff and consistent support was provided.

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

We saw that people’s preferred communication methods were recorded in their care plans. The registered manager told us they spoke to the person and their relative to share information as this was their preferred way to communicate. People we spoke to confirmed this.

Staff told us they could provide large print information where required and adapt their method of sharing information to meet the needs of people. This meant the provider could be assured that information was shared with people in the most appropriate way.

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.

The registered manager told us they communicated regularly with people and their relatives, and we saw these communications were recorded. We saw that regular feedback had been gained during these discussions.

The provider had completed surveys with people to gain their feedback and to give opportunities to raise areas for improvements. At the time of this assessment all feedback they had received from people and their relatives was positive.

The provider had a complaints policy and recorded any concerns, compliments or complaints in order to ensure action was taken where needed and feedback was provided to people. The registered manager told us they provided information to people about how to complain or give feedback when support commenced.

We spoke to one relative who told us they were in regular contact with the manager, they told us, “If I have any concerns I call [registered manager] and we change things if needed”. This meant people were listened to and involved in their care.

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

Assessments covering the accessibility of people’s environment and whether any adaptations, equipment or referrals to occupational therapists were needed, had been completed. We saw evidence that whilst a relative was away they requested a preferred staff member who the person felt most comfortable with to support them. The provider arranged for this to happen. This meant the provider could be assured that people could access the support they needed.

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 registered manager confirmed that there was an equality and diversity policy and everyone was treated equally. Staff had completed training in equality and diversity. Staff we spoke to told us they had been supported by the registered manager when they were adapting to a new culture. We were told. “[Registered manager] was very supportive, we were provided with videos to show us how to prepare British foods,” and “I was supported to find a GP”.

The registered manger told us they had supported a person to access mobility aids in order to improve their access to their home. This meant the provider focused on people’s experiences and strived for equality.

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.

People’s care plans included details of people’s future plans such as support they wanted at the end of life. Care plans also highlighted where important information related to people’s wishes was stored within their home. This meant that people’s wishes were met and staff had access to the information they needed to ensure people were supported in they way the wished.