Mercury Care Services 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.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained 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 made sure people were at the centre of their care and support choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

However, people’s care plans were not always sufficiently person-centred. Some people’s care plans lacked individualised, person-centred information and instructions about how they would like their personal care carried out, how to support them with a healthy and nutritious diet, how to support them to be independent and what drinks to give them, for example.

However, we found no evidence anyone had been harmed or adversely affected by these issues and staff knew people, their needs and their preferences well and delivered their care in a person-centred way. This meant the issue we found with people’s care plans was a record keeping issue and we have dealt with that in the governance, management and sustainability section of the Well-led key question. During our assessment the provider explained what they would do to ensure people’s care plans were sufficiently person-centred and we were confident the provider would take the necessary action.

People’s care plans were regularly reviewed with them, and their relatives where appropriate, to ensure staff had up to date information about each person’s care and support.

People and their relatives told us they were happy with their care and support.

A person said, “I would recommend the service because the staff are so nice” and “They’re [staff] just really, really nice. They’re so happy, they make me happy.” Another person told us, “I think I would recommend them [the service].”

A person’s relative said, “The carers are just wonderful, and I’ve not got any complaints at all.”

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 provider worked with other healthcare services and local authorities to ensure people received the right care and support at the right time, including escalating concerns and making referrals to other services when necessary. The provider also ensured people had continuity of care by ensuring they received their care and support from the same care staff.

A person told us, “There’s only one person that comes at a time. I told them if they’re going to be changing anyone coming to me, they need to tell me because I’m not good with strangers. I said not to send new people to me and they don’t. They’ve been consistent with the people they’ve sent.” Another person said, “‘There’s about three or four [care staff]. I’ve got a main one and when they’re off work, I have the other carers to look after me.” One other person told us, “On the Wednesday and Thursday I have [member of staff] and the other days I have [member of staff].”

The provider did not always supply appropriate information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

Some people told us they did not have access to their care records. We found some people had care records in their home and online, but some people’s care records were only online. Some of them said they could not access their online records. We found no evidence anyone had been harmed or adversely affected by this issue.

A person told us, “‘I haven’t seen my care records.” Another person said, “They [staff] said they have it [the person’s care records] online in the office. I can’t see them. What they write on my report and what they are saying, it would be nice for me to see. I would like to see my records.”

The provider followed the 5 principles of the Accessible Information Standard (AIS) when assessing and recording people’s communication needs. The AIS is a law which aims to make sure people with a disability or sensory loss are given information they can understand.

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 complaints policy and procedures in place. Complaints were recorded and investigated and the provider responded with an outcome to people who had complained. The provider audited complaints to identify themes and patterns and improve the service.

The provider also carried out feedback surveys with people, their relatives and staff and used their feedback to improve the service. The provider had identified themes in feedback from people and staff and had taken action to improve communication with staff regarding changes to care calls, and overall customer service for people, for example.

The provider had received compliments from people and their relatives and had shared them with staff. These included praise for staff being well trained and patient and appreciation for staff being caring and understanding people’s individual needs.

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

People, their relatives and staff could contact the office staff and managers via telephone and email during the day, and there was an on-call system in place for them to ring the service out of office hours. The telephone numbers to use were in people’s care folders in their home. People, their relatives and staff also had the registered manager’s telephone number and were able to call them at any time to request emergency care or to change care call times.

A person told us, “I have a folder in my home. If I am concerned, I will call them [the service].” Another person said, “I will phone them [the registered manager] if there’s a problem.” A person’s relative told us, “I can get in touch with the service. If I want to ask any questions I can ring them.”

A member of staff said, “I can contact the office and even the registered manager anytime.They have an on-call system I can use as well.” Another member of staff told us, “We have an on-call number for out of hours.”

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.

Staff had completed equality, diversity and human rights training and people had good outcomes.

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.

Staff received end of life care training, and the provider completed end of life care plans with people and their relatives where appropriate.