Shalom

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 for this service since its registration under a new provider. This key question has been rated Good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 79 (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. Relatives told us they were very happy with the way people were supported which put them at the centre of the care provided. Support records demonstrated a person centred approach to support for people. This was also reflected in the way staff worked with people. Care plans were detailed and reflected the choices and needs of people.

The provider had an exceptional understanding of the diverse health and care needs of people, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity. Leaders demonstrated a detailed understanding of people’s needs and had at times challenged other professionals when they felt decisions were not being made in the best interests of people. A relative of the person stated, “I don’t believe [person] would still be here without the care and dedication of them all”. The registered manager, using Stopping Over Medication of People with a Learning Disability and Autistic People (STOMP) principles, demonstrated how they had worked proactively with 2 people’s clinical leads to ask for medicines to be reviewed when they thought they could be reduced. This meant people and their families could be assured their medicines were appropriate and needed. In doing this, both people had reduced their medicines leading to a positive impact quality of life. Further the registered manager demonstrated how they had worked with family and other professionals to support someone to be discharged from hospital to receive nursing care at home. This discharge was meant to be for end of life care and support however, once home and receiving support from staff who knew them well, this person’s health improved. As their health improved the registered manager ensured they worked in partnership with medical professionals to ensure the person’s support was adjusted to be in line with their current support needs.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. Relatives told us they received regular updates from the provider. One person shared they had daily calls from the staff to update them on the wellbeing of their relative. People’s communication needs were clearly recorded in their care plans and staff knew how people communicated. The provider ensured people were supported appropriately when information was shared with them by talking through the information with people.

Systems were in place to store confidential information, and the provider had systems to ensure compliance with the UK General Data Protection Regulations (UK GDPR).

Relatives told us they had access to any information they needed and knew who to go to if they wanted to ask about something.

The provider made it easy for people and their relatives to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff involved people and their relatives in decisions about their care and support. The provider sought formal feedback, in the form of questionnaires, and informal feedback from relatives when they visited or spoke to staff at the service. Relatives shared that leaders were always open to any feedback and acted upon things they had raised.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. Care plans detailed when staff should engage with other professionals including in an emergency. People needed a variety of equipment such as hoists and wheelchairs to support them with their needs. Leaders ensured people got access to equipment they required by referring people to the appropriate professionals. Leaders and staff ensured any equipment was regularly reviewed and serviced.

Staff and leaders actively listened and acted on 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 manager was aware of the barriers people with disabilities can face and ensured people were engaged and had become part of their local community. The provider had an accessible vehicle for people to use which meant they could access their local town and use community and leisure facilities there. The provider had supported people to engage with their local community. Leader felt people were involved in a positive way with their community, for example enabling them to attend Sunday church service.

The provider had hospital passports in place for people. This meant if they were admitted to hospital, medical staff could read and understand the support needs of people they were caring for to ensure the received equal treatment.

Staff had completed mandatory equality and diversity training.

People and their families 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 end of life plans in place which had been completed by involving them, their family and friends and staff who knew them well. Staff had attended end of life training to support 1 person’s choice to not be admitted to hospital if they became significantly unwell.