Ryssa Healthcare 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 71 (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 did not always make sure that effective systems were in place to ensure people were at the centre of their care and treatment.

Care plans and risk assessment in place did not always provide enough information about people’s likes, dislikes and preferences. However, staff were able to tell us about the support people needed and their individual likes, dislikes and preferences. This meant people may be at risk of not receiving person centred care if temporary or new staff who did not know them well were responsible for the provision of their care.

People felt involved with their care, however these reviews were not always recorded to show how people had been involved and how their feedback had been considered.

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 registered manager told us, and we saw there were systems in place to monitor and review care. This included provisions to ensure consistent care was delivered.

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

Care plans reflected the levels of support, and the ways people chose to communicate and how information should be made available to them. The registered manager confirmed information was provided to people in a format or language they could understand if requested.

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.

People felt listened to, involved with their care and knew how to complain. A person told us, “I’ve never had to complain that the carers have missed anything out that need doing”.

The provider demonstrated a commitment to seeking people's views on care delivery, and the feedback reviewed reflected positive experiences and outcomes.

The registered manager told us as the service grew, they would analysis this feedback and make changes where needed.

Although no complaints had been received, there was a system in place to ensure complaints were responded to in line with the providers own policy and procedure.

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

There were processes in place that the registered manager could consider if concerns arose. They told us they could communicate and engage with external agencies to raise concerns if needed.

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.

The registered manager was aware of inequalities people receiving support may face and were able to tell us the action they would take if concerns arose. There were systems in place to consider and act on people’s experiences in care.

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 registered manager confirmed they were not supporting anyone who was currently receiving end of life care. However, they explained the process they would follow should they need to support on end of life care. This information was considered as part of the assessment process.