CRM Healthcare Solutions 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 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 68 (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. The provider and staff knew the people they supported well and worked with people, families and healthcare professionals to ensure care provided met people’s needs. However, this was not always reflected in people’s care plans and risk assessments. Risk assessments were often generic and did not reflect the individual’s needs and abilities.

One person told us, “I believe I have a care plan, but I haven’t seen it in detail, but I can’t think of anything further I need than what I’m already getting” and a relative told us, “We have a care plan and I’m privy to the plan. We have tweaked it every so often”.

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.

In general people saw the same carers consistently for their care calls so they were able to build a good rapport. One relative told us, “The carers are very good at getting their sense of humour and understanding of [person]. They are very safe with the carers present. We get the same carers that alternate as a group”.

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

Care plans outlined how staff should best support people to effectively communicate, this included use of non-verbal communication for some people.

Staff used the electronic record system efficiently to share real-time updates regarding people's well-being and changing preferences to the provider based at the office.

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.

Feedback surveys were sent to people and families and the provider carried out regular telephone calls to people and their families to get feedback on the care provided. The management team also carried out care calls themselves and with staff to complete quality spot checks on care.

People and relatives all told us they had a good relationship with the management team and were kept up to date with any issues.

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

Due to the providers rural location and barriers experienced they had invested in a mobility car to ensure they could support people with access to the community and appointments more easily. Communication and referrals to other healthcare professionals was timely and well documented within care records.

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 provider had policies on equality, diversity and inclusion, and staff had completed relevant training. This helped ensure they understood people’s protected characteristics and the importance of delivering fair and equal care.

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.

Staff had not received training on end-of-life care and there was no end-of-life care plan in place for those actively on this care pathway. Records did include information about people’s advance decisions, specifically ‘do not attempt cardiovascular pulmonary resuscitation’ (DNACPR) and where in the house the information was located.

We spoke with the registered manager who recognised this and explained that although people and relatives were provided an opportunity to plan end of life care in advance, it was often difficult to engage people in discussions on this topic.