Fresh Tree Care Services – Surrey Branch

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 service 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 service 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 told us the care they received was person-centred; they said staff did what they needed them to do. The service was responsive to people’s needs and worked in partnership with people and their loved ones, a relative told us, “They are accommodating when I need to make a change.” Staff told us they had enough up-to-date information about people’s needs to provide safe care. Staff were confident in the service they provided and told us it was important to put people at the centre of their work. A member of staff said, “I have regular clients, which helps me meet and understand their needs, build good relationships and provide consistent care.”

The service 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 told us they had access to the care they needed to stay safe and live well at home. This included seeing their GP or nurse. Relatives told us they were confident in the staff to seek medical advice if needed. Smaller staff teams who provided consistent care and support had meant they could identify changes in a person’s condition quicker. Staff told us they contacted the service office or professionals such as, GPs, community nurses and occupational therapists. Records showed input from health and social care professionals. Information was shared through meetings and messaging systems.

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

People told us staff communicated well with them and provided information about care visits and timings. A person said, “The office often just calls me to see if I am ok, which is nice.” People’s communication needs were detailed in their care plans. This information was highlighted if a person had specific communication requirements and shared with relevant professionals. We were assured this service met the requirements of the Accessible Information Standard (AIS). The AIS isa law to make sure that people who have a disability, impairment or sensory loss receive information they can easily read or understand. The service adapted to meet people’s individual communication needs. A relative told us, “Communication with the service is very good.”

The service made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. They involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

The provider actively sought feedback from people, their relatives, professionals and staff. Information was continually shared with people and staff, and this was monitored by the management team and kept updated. People told us they knew how to raise a concern or make a complaint. A person told us, “If I am unhappy, they treat me well.” Everyone was positive and had confidence in the provider, the registered manager and deputy manager to address any concerns they had. The registered manager told us, “Every client is informed to raise any complaints with the office. After we are made aware, we always get back to them with our findings and follow up as well to make sure everything is fine and ok.” A complaints policy supported the practice and records showed complaints were managed in accordance with the policy. This had included reflections and lessons learned.

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

People told us they received care and support, which was accessible and considered their individual needs. Staff received training in equality and diversity, and they told us they supported people to live well. Policies and procedures underpinned all safe working practices, and this was supported by training, monitoring and ongoing competency checks. Policies and procedures referenced equity, accessibility and safety.

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 and their relatives told us they were treated fairly, and their rights were respected. Staff had access to various ways of raising concerns about treatment which discriminates, they told us the registered manager would take them seriously. Staff training, guidance and monitoring meant staff were reminded of their responsibilities. The deputy manager told us staff were reminded of key points of their training within supervisions and spot checks in the community. The registered manager told us, “Everyone has freedom here to practice their religion and cultures. We encourage everyone to do that and respect each other.” Policies, procedures and working practices within the service were in accordance with relevant legislation to ensure people and staff received fair treatment.

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 were provided with opportunities to discuss their care needs in their last years and days, including advanced planning. Care plans were person-centred, and initial assessments and regular reviews meant the service had recorded the person’s views in all aspects of their care and support. The deputy manager told us they worked with external health professionals to support people to remain at home, safe and comfortable for as long as they could.