Conscience Care 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 service since its registration. This key question has been rated requires improvement. This meant people’s needs were not always met.

This service scored 61 (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 people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they did not always work in partnership with people, to decide how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

People’s care and support plans were not always updated, as needed, and contained conflicting information in parts. People told us the service did not always meet their individual needs due to timings and poor communication.

However, people were satisfied when with staff and they told us they did all they needed for them during their visits. One person said, “I’d recommend the [staff] as they are very good, when they arrive.”

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.

People had access to medical support, if needed, including social care professionals. Staff told us they could contact the provider for support, and this included out of hours with the on-call service. A member of staff said, “The on-call service is helpful and responsive whenever I need advice or support outside normal office hours.”

The provider did not always supply appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

People told us sometimes the service did not meet their needs; they found the service unreliable. This meant the provider was not providing accurate information to people and their relatives as they were not always adhering to the agreed schedules for care. People told us when they contacted the service, they did not always get an answer or a response to their concern.

We shared feedback in general terms with the provider who was keen to resolve this and restore trust in the service.

The provider did not always make it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support.

People were not always able to resolve their concerns and were sometimes disappointed by the lack of response from the service. One person said, “No onelistens when I ring.” Providers should be using feedback about their service to make improvements and this needs to accessible to people, their family and staff. Another person told us, “I leave amessage,but they stilldon’tget back to me.”

The provider 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 to their satisfaction once staff were with them. Staff received training in equality and diversity, and they told us how they supported people ensuring their dignity. Policies and procedures underpinned all working practices, and this was supported by staff training. 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.

The provider welcomed people and staff from all cultures, backgrounds and lifestyles. Staff had access to various ways of raising concerns about treatment which discriminates, and they told us the provider would act. Staff training meant staff were reminded of their responsibilities.A member of staff said, Policies, procedures and working practices within the service were in accordance with relevant legislation to ensure people and staff received fair treatment.

People were not always 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 provider said people were given the opportunity to discuss their future wishes and preferences, but these had not been recorded. This meant there was a strong possibility people’s needs, wishes and preferences may not be carried out correctly.