CSL Lincoln

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 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 were informed about their options for care, support and treatment. We observed people actively making decisions about how this was delivered. Where individuals were unable to fully participate in planning their support, relatives and other relevant parties were involved to ensure care aligned with their needs and known preferences.

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.When possible, people and their relatives were actively involved in decisions about care and support, particularly when changes to individuals’ needs had occurred.

Training records showed staff received specific training relevant to the needs of the people they supported, and inductions helped them understand the people they were supporting.

Processes were in place to monitor delivered hours and maintain communication with people and their relatives regarding changing needs and funding requests. A staff member explained that a person had recently moved to a soft diet and now required full supervision during mealtimes to ensure their safety. To meet these changing needs, the provider requested additional funding so the right level of support could be maintained. This demonstrated the service’s proactive approach to adapting care and securing resources to keep people safe and well.

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

The service identified people’s individual communication needs and ensured information was provided in an accessible format, including adjustments for specific requirements. Staff told us how they often adapted their communication style like using objects of reference or assistive technology to ensure people could engage fully. Some relatives felt this could be further improved to ensure people could effectively communicate, make informed choices and participate in decisions about their care and support.

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 families were informed about how to provide feedback or raise concerns and processes were in place to make this easy and accessible. Relatives told us they felt confident their feedback would be listened to and acted upon and staff confirmed that suggestions and concerns were taken seriously and used to improve the service.

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

Staff felt the service was accessible and demonstrated awareness of challenges such as communication difficulties and social factors and worked with people proactively to address these. Staff told us they were confident in advocating for people’s rights and ensuring reasonable adjustments were made so everyone 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.

During the assessment, no concerns were raised about anyone experiencing discrimination. Staff demonstrated a clear understanding of people’s rights and expressed confidence in advocating for people when necessary. Relatives told us they trusted staff to speak up and act appropriately if they believed their family member was being treated unfairly. To support this, staff received training on equality and diversity. These measures helped create an inclusive environment where people’s rights were respected and upheld.

People and their families were included in discussions about end-of-life care when appropriate and had opportunities to express their wishes regarding certain medical decisions.

The service had started to engage with people who previously had not discussed their end-of-life wishes or had chosen not to. This gave people the opportunity to explore decisions relating to their future and ensure these were recorded in a way that suited them. Some people had decisions around emergency care and treatment that outlined clinical recommendations alongside personal preferences recorded in their care plans. This meant in critical situations; healthcare professionals would be aware of people’s preferences which helps to reduce stress on people and their families.