South Street

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 the service under this provider. 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 ensured people were at the centre of their care and treatment.

The provider told us how the pre-admission assessments were important in obtaining information about people’s individual needs and preferences and how this information was then captured within people’s care plans which staff followed.

In line with the ‘Right support, right care, and right culture’ guidance, care records showed that people’s individual assessed needs and preferences were documented, and observations showed that these needs and preferences were promoted and respected by staff. For example, we observed staff talking with people about upcoming cultural events that were important to them, with staff also telling us that people were supported to practice their faiths as they wished to.

Relatives feedback was also positive, with 1 relative saying, “They know [person] very well.”

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported continuity.

There were systems and processes in place to ensure people’s care was regularly reviewed and the provider told us there were systems in place to share this information with staff so people could receive consistent care, such as care plan and risk assessment reviews, handover records, staff meetings and supervisions.

Staff told us how they were aware of people’s health needs and how they supported people to meet these needs in consultation with external health professionals. For example, 1 staff member told us how the home supported a person with swallowing needs to use adapted equipment and have a modified diet in accordance with external professional guidance.

This meant we were assured the service had a good understanding of people’s health needs and worked with community health services.

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

Communication care plans were in place and detailed how people communicate, any potential barriers to this communication and how staff can promote this.

We saw people were able to communicate with one another and staff using formal verbal language. We also observed staff had a good awareness of how people’s communication needs can be affected by particular situations and how they are feeling. For example, staff were seen anticipating a potential barrier to a person being able to communicate and providing them with the opportunity to communicate their feelings in a different environment, which enabled the person to feel more comfortable.

Staff and the provider also showed us information, such as menu and activity plans, which were in a pictorial format for people who may not always be able to read written information.

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.

We saw there was a complaints policy in place, and the provider told us they had received no complaints for some time. We asked people if they felt staff listened to them and involved them in decisions about their life, and we were told this is the case. A person we spoke with said, “Yeah, they listen”, while another said, “I do what I want. Staff let me know when I need to make a decision about something – and I make it.”

As we were unable to review any recent complaints records, the provider told us how they would respond to complaints should these be received, which included sharing with staff to aid learning.

We spoke with relatives who told us they were involved in people’s care. For example, 1 relative said, “Yes, I do feel they involve me. They call me or I call them, or they speak with me when I visit.” While another relative said, “I feel informed. If anything is the matter, they will let me know and will listen to what I’ve got to say.”

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

Staff and the provider told us people were supported to access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it, and the service worked with external agencies to facilitate this. Furthermore, staff explained how barriers to external care and treatment can be supported by an understanding of people’s needs and by respecting this. For example, staff told us of an occasion in which a person appeared uncomfortable in the lead-up to a health intervention by an external health professional. This resulted to them speaking to the person to discover what the issue was, respecting their desire to re-schedule the appointment and then supporting the person to attend the appointment when they felt more comfortable doing so.

We observed people’s care plans documented factors that could be barriers to them accessing external care when required, such as people’s behaviour needs, and how these needs could be understood and supported to ensure that they did not compromise people’s access to care.

One relative told us the service encouraged them to be present and support their relative during appointments, with the relative saying, “I’m encouraged to be involved where I can to help with appointments and that kind of thing.”

This meant we were assured people’s care was robust and the provider was committed to ensuring people’s continued access to care, support and treatment was supported.

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.

An equality and diversity policy and staff training were in place, which meant we were assured the service understood the challenges people faced in experiencing equitable outcomes and how they could mitigate these.

Care plans provided information to staff on how they could support people in this area, and relatives told us they were also involved in their relation’s lives, which further ensured that their experiences and outcomes could be as equitable as possible.

Staff and leaders told us about some of the barriers people using the service experienced as a result of their needs, and how they understood the impact these could have on people’s experiences and how to support them to overcome these barriers. For example, people were supported to go on holiday, which involved them accessing places and services unfamiliar to them. Staff anticipated what some of the potential barriers to this might be and so they held a holiday planning meeting in which potential challenges were discussed and solutions sought.

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.

People had care plans which clearly documented their wishes and the arrangements in place for important life changes.

This meant we were assured the provider had considered this aspect of people’s care as something that required care planning should people’s needs change.