Newgencaregroup (Dorset)

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 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 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.

The provider established processes to ensure people received personalised care that was responsive to their needs, wishes and preferences. The care plan we reviewed contained person-centred details, including life history, goals, skills, abilities and how they preferred to manage their health. Staff enabled people to participate in person-centred activities and encouraged them to maintain their hobbies and interests.

Processes and systems were in place to ensure people’s changing needs were met. The provider worked in partnership with people and their loved ones. 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, “People are supported to live meaningful lives, access the community, attend appointments and engage in activities they enjoy while promoting independence and wellbeing.”

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.

There were systems and processes in place to ensure continuity of care. Comprehensive assessments were undertaken before care delivery commenced. People’s needs were fully reviewed to ensure their suitability for the service, and to facilitate a smooth transition from one service to another.

People were supported by the same regular care workers. Staff worked in collaboration with external health and social care professionals when needed. Staff and leaders kept professionals up to date with any concerning information about people’s wellbeing and followed any guidance given.

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

People were provided with a ‘Service User Guide’ which outlined clear service agreements that detailed how they could raise concerns and what they could expect from staff. Key documents were available in larger font sizes, audio recordings for visually impaired service users, an ‘Easy Read’ simplified version with pictures and plain language. The provider was also prepared to arrange translation into other languages on request.

The provider ensured people’s care plans and records captured how people were supported to engage in meaningful communication and decision-making. This enabled people to be active participants in their care if this was their wish.
We reviewed person’s care plan which clearly identified communication needs and what staff should do to support communication. A member of staff told us, “I support people with communication needs by speaking clearly, listening patiently, using simple language, writing things down if needed, and making sure hearing aids or communication aids are working properly.”

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.

The provider had a policy and procedure in place that set out the steps someone would need to take to make a complaint, and information on how to complain was contained within the service user guide. This ensured all complaints would be investigated and a response provided to the person.

The provider actively encouraged people and relatives to share feedback about the service. The provider responded appropriately and used feedback to improve care delivery.

Staff told us managers listened to feedback and involved people in decisions about changes to care. This demonstrated a responsive approach where people’s views contributed to how the service developed.

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

The provider had systems and processes in place to ensure people were able to access appropriate and timely care when required, including during weekends and bank holidays. This meant people experienced reliable care delivery in line with agreed arrangements.

The provider monitored visit attendance through the electronic log-in and log-out system. Alerts were sent to the office team if a visit had not been attended or if staff were running late. The provider had an on-call service to ensure senior staff members could be contacted at all hours of the day and night if needed for advice or for additional support during care calls.

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.

Policies relating to equality, diversity and discrimination were in place and followed current best practice guidance. These policies set clear expectations for staff on how to promote fairness and inclusion and ensure people were treated without bias. Staff were aware of their responsibilities and understood the importance of providing equitable care and support.

The care plan structure showed good consideration of people’s protected characteristics and the reasonable adjustments they required. This included documenting mobility needs, communication preferences, cultural considerations and support that helped people have a positive experience of care.

Training records confirmed that staff had completed equality related training, helping them better understand how to recognise and challenge discrimination and provide inclusive care. This supported the service in delivering fair outcomes and ensuring people received the same quality of care regardless of their background or individual characteristics.

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 provider had systems and processes in place to ensure people were supported to plan for changes in their care needs and to help them plan for the future. Care planning included the consideration of longer‑term needs where appropriate. This helped ensure people could continue receiving care safely and effectively in their own homes. As part of assessment the provider asked about their wishes for future care and objectives they wanted to achieve. This offered clear guidance for staff on when to involve other professionals to support future planning. Staff had undertaken training in providing end of life care.

At the time of our assessment, no one using the service was being cared for at the end of their lives.