FastFallsResponse 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 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 complimentary about staff and felt they truly listened to them and how they wanted to live their lives. A relative said, “Staff are all very respectful to [person] and always make sure [person] is happy with what they are doing.”

Staff told us they worked hard to ensure people had choices and their care was person-centred.

Care plans were person centred and detailed people’s likes, dislikes, hobbies and relevant medical history.

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 service regularly worked with external professionals such occupational therapists. Care plans included information and recommendations from health and social care professionals. Information was shared with a variety of professionals through telephone calls, emails and meetings to ensure people’s care needs were met.

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

Communication needs were assessed and detailed in people’s care plans.

We were assured this service met the requirements of the Accessible Information Standard (AIS). The AIS is a law to make sure that people who have a disability, impairment or sensory loss receive information they can easily read or understand. The registered manager confirmed information could be obtained in a variety of formats in a way people could understand.For example, providing documentation and information in pictorial form or large print.

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 provider organised a survey for all people receiving care. Results were positive, however they were not fully analysed or shared with stakeholders at the time of the inspection.

People and relatives confirmed they knew how to make a complaint if needed and felt they could approach the registered manager. Comments included, “The registered manager is always available at the end of the phone and willing to listen to any concerns I have”, “The registered manager is well organised and always willing to listen and advise if the need arises and always has time for me also if I feel I need to talk about [person] and [person’s] ongoing health problems”, and “If I had any concerns I have contact numbers and an e mail address.”

The registered manager told us people and relatives regularly communicated with the office and any concerns raised were addressed promptly.

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

Records confirmed people were provided with the support and intervention of external health care professionals when required. The provider had an on-call system so that people, relatives and staff could access support at any time.

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.

People’s care and support were tailored to meet their individual needs and preferences. People and their relatives spoke positively about the care provided and told us they were happy with the support they received.

Although 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, currently the care plans in place did not have a separate section to discuss their end of life wishes.

The registered manager told us they asked about people’s end of life wishes, however as at the time of the inspection nobody was receiving care in their last days, there were no specific care plans in relation to this. Staff had access to relevant training and the provider confirmed they would complete necessary documentation if required.

People who had do not attempt resuscitation orders (DNACPR) had these clearly documented in their care records. Staff confirmed they knew where to find this information this meant people’s immediate end of life wishes could be respected.