Riseup Healthcare Ltd

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment, and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence. At our last assessment, we rated this key question good. At this assessment, the rating has remained. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

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’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them. People told us they had their needs assessed at the beginning of their time at the service, and that they were being supported by the staff to meet them. Relatives told us that the provider always contacted them when there were any changes. Staff told us that people’s care plans contained all the information they needed to effectively support them, and that the care plans were updated regularly. One staff said, “Where we notice any changes, we inform the office, and these are integrated into the person’s care plan.” We saw from people’s care plans that their needs had been holistically assessed with person-centred care plans developed as a result. They considered people’s strengths, choices, and independence and put them in control of the care they received

The provider planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. They did this in line with legislation and current evidence-based good practice and standards. The provider showed us case studies of how they had supported people to achieving personal goals and improve their independence. The number of calls required by people was reviewed regularly and increased or decreased in line with the person’s current need. Staff knew the people they supported well and knew their needs. Staff told us that people’s preferences were shared within the team to ensure consistent support from every member of the team.

The provider worked well across teams and services to support people. They made sure people only needed to tell their story once by sharing their assessment of needs when people moved between different services. The provider had partitioned the coverage map into geographical areas, with separate teams for each area. People got to see the regular staff on their team, which allowed for person centred care deliver and more engaging conversations with staff. The local authority told us that they worked well with the provider, and there were no concerns. We saw evidence of communication with the local authority around people’s needs, with no issues raised. We saw many examples of where the service worked with others to achieve positive outcomes for people.

The provider supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice, and control. Staff supported people to live healthier lives and, where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support. Staff told us that they worked with families to respond to people’s health needs and in emergencies. People had an emergency information pack, which told staff what to do in cases of emergency. They told us the importance of people maintaining a healthy lifestyle as well as promoting their wellbeing and independence.

Records showed that the service worked with health professionals to ensure people’s health needs were met and their well-being maintained. Referrals were made to the relevant professionals to prompt reassessment and the provision of relevant equipment to ensure safe care for people.

The provider routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured that outcomes were positive and consistent, and that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves. People told us that someone from the office came to them regularly to review their care plans. We saw that relatives were included in decisions and processes. One relative told us, “I am usually there when the reviews are taking place.” Staff told us they felt the people who used the service were well cared for and that the service achieved positive outcomes for people. One staff member told us, “It feels great to visit the same people every day, as I become part of their journey to live a safe and healthy life.” A process was in place that ensured people were able to regularly provide feedback on the service, and the registered manager was able to monitor quality.

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. People told us that they had consented to the care they were currently receiving. We saw evidence that initial assessments were carried out before the commencement of service delivery. One person told us, “Staff listen to me and speak politely.” Staff told us that they were respectful of people’s wishes and of their environment. One staff member told us, “Although it is usually busy, I take a few minutes to talk to people before commencing care.”

Care plans showed consent was in place from the appropriate people. We did find that consent had not been sought and recorded on whether people were happy with the flexible times for care calls. This was pointed out to the registered manager, and they committed to rectifying this.