Executive Connect 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.

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.

There were appropriate policies to make sure care was person centred, and care plans were written in a person-centred way. Staff took account of individual needs, preferences and likes and dislikes. We saw that care notes were written respectfully. A health professional gave an example of person-centred care; the service arranged for a staff member that could translate during a review meeting, as English was not their first language.

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities.

Support was flexible and tailored, and where appropriate support levels could be increased or reduced.

Staff rotas were managed so that care was consistent and continuous, but also changes could be made when needed.

The service's processes made sure that managers and staff understood the diverse health and care needs of people and the local community. Care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

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

Information was tailored according to people’s needs. The provider made sure that people had communication passports in their care plans so that staff knew the best way to talk to people. Staff rotas were consistent which meant that staff had the opportunity to spend time with people and understood their communication needs well.

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.

There was a complaints policy, and we saw evidence that complaints were dealt with effectively and in a timely manner. People had different opportunities to provide feedback about the service and the manager collate low level concerns and compliments also.

A relative told us they had problems with language barriers when the service first commenced, however this was quickly resolved when it was raised with the manager.

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

The provider had links in the local community to provide opportunities to share information about the service so that people were aware how to access. The support was flexible and could adapt to meet the needs of people so they could access it when they needed it, including during emergencies.

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.

There were appropriate policies which took account of health inequalities and barriers to care and treatment. The service had a good understanding about difficulties people may face regarding care outcomes. The manager gave consideration about how the service could reach people whose voices were not always heard.

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 service was not supporting anyone who was at the end of their life at the time of the assessment. Staff completed relevant end of life training, and they could access further training if required specific to people’s needs. End of life care planning was evident in people’s care plan. We saw positive feedback from a relative of a person staff had cared for when they were at the end of their life.