Care Champions Support Ltd

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 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.

Care plans included people’s needs, background and life story with detailed information on support required such as with moving and handling, personal care and continence. A pain management care plan was in place that included how staff should be mindful of certain areas when supporting people with arthritis to minimise pain and discomfort. A summary sheet was also in place that included summary of people’s support needs. A staff member told us, “Care plans are very helpful. When you start your job, you always look for the care plan. I always look at it when I start job then I start my work. I look at this to make sure people get person centred care.”

Staff told us they knew how people liked to be supported and found the care plans helpful. A staff member told us, “Care plans are the most helpful to provide proper care. Our care plan is accurate and very helpful. I endorse it, there has been no issues.” Feedback from a person included, ‘[Staff member] has been amazing support, always compassionate, respectful and attentive to my needs. His dedication makes such as positive difference in my daily life.’

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.

People had a positive relationship with staff and had access to services. Staff told us that people had access to health services when needed. Staff completed daily notes when care was delivered to ensure people received continuity of care.

People were able to choose who they would like to support them and the service accommodated that where possible, such as people’s preference with female or male carers. People had the same care staff to form positive relationships and people received good care provisions and continuity of care.

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

The provider met the Accessible Information Standard, ensuring people received information in accessible formats where required. Care plans included information on if people required support with Accessible Information Standards.

Care plans included communication plans that detailed information on how to communicate effectively with people and people’s preferred communication style. People were able to provide preferences on choosing care staff that spoke the same language as them and the service accommodated requests where possible. A relative told us, “From what I can see, the carers are trained and they communicate well because they are speaking the same language as [person] is speaking. So far it is very good.” Another relative commented, “These carers they listen to [person] and they understand [person’s] way of communicating, moods, gestures, eye pointing, they are attentive to [person]. The more [person] knows people are attentive, the more [person] tries to communicate, so it minimises frustration, which is what I’m looking for.”

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support.

The service used quality monitoring systems to gather feedback from people and their relatives. Feedback was analysed and used to make improvements where possible.

The provider managed concerns and complaints through a clear policy that detailed the complaints process. Complaints had been managed with investigations being completed alongside actions taken such as further training and enhanced supervisions to ensure the risk of reoccurrence was minimised. Staff were also able to tell us the process to manage complaints and concerns, which was escalated to management for review.

Records showed a feedback from a person included, ‘The care staff are always kind, patient and attentive. They make me feel safe and respected every day. I really appreciate their dedication and the way they listen to my needs.’

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

People received the support and care they needed, when they needed it. Staff agreed on the care and support with people and their relatives.

Regular reviews of care took place to ensure people received care and support. The management team was also on call if people needed emergency support.

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 assessed and planned for people’s diverse needs. They made sure barriers to providing care were identified and mitigated. Staff liaised with people and their relatives to make sure they felt their needs were being met. A relative told us, “Yeah, so [person] is [of religion] and there are cleansing rituals with that, and they [staff] do listen to her requests.”

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 provider discussed future planning with people during reviews based on their support needs. People’s expectations were discussed and recorded on their care plans, which was reviewed regularly to check if expectations were being met.

People were not receiving end of life care during the assessment. The provider had policies in place to help guide staff on how to support people to express their preferences on end-of-life care if needed.