Highland Care UK 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.

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 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.

Relatives confirmed staff respected people’s choices around the care they received. A relative told us, “I guess they do because if [person] says, ‘I don’t want you to do this’, they [staff] just don’t do it.” Staff understood the importance of giving a personalised care service. Responses from staff included, “Person-centred care should be the basis of every approach. Options should be presented to the person to make informed decisions” and “I always try to provide person-centred care by involving people in decisions about their daily lives.” We saw care plans were person-centred focussing on individual needs and preferences. This meant staff had clear guidance about how each person wanted their care.

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 managers knew about the different services available in the local area. They gave examples of where they had worked jointly with services such as occupational therapists, district nurses and the continence team to ensure good outcomes for people. Staff gave examples of supporting people, when needed, to access care and treatment in a timely way where people or families were unable to manage this.

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

People’s communication needs and preferences were clearly recorded in care records. People and relatives confirmed they were satisfied with how the service provided information to them.

Staff described the different methods of communication they used with people including body language, facial expressions, eye movement and pictures.

The managers told us when a person needed staff who could speak their native language, they would try to match the person with staff who spoke that language. They explained that on occasions where this was not possible, commissioners provided an interpreter. The nominated individual told us they used digital services to produce written information in another language, large print or in a pictorial format to help people 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.

People and relatives confirmed they knew how to make a complaint. They told us they felt the provider listened to feedback and concerns and took appropriate action as needed. People were given an information pack when they began to use the service which included information on how to raise concerns or complain.

The provider carried out regular surveys by post, in person and by telephone to capture feedback from people and families. Records showed information gathered from surveys was added to the service continuous improvement plan which detailed the action to be taken and by whom.

The nominated individual told us people and relatives could also share feedback and ideas during quarterly review meetings.

The provider ensured, as far as possible, that people and their families could access their care and support when they needed it and in line with their preferences.

The provider considered the skills and culture of individual staff when matching staff to people. The provider used their knowledge of local services to make referrals to other agencies to ensure no gaps in people’s needs being met. The provider actively recruited a diverse workforce to meet the range of needs and culture of people living in the borough.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, and support in response to this. People and relatives told us staff respected their cultural and religious needs.

Staff demonstrated they understood how to ensure equity in experiences of care for people. A staff member gave an example of a person who had a dedicated place of worship in their home and staff were instructed not to move anything in this area during cleaning, unless the person gave permission, in order to respect the sanctity of the space. A staff member told us, “Care is always person-centred and respectful. I treat everyone equally, I respect their identity and preferences and ensure [people] feel safe and valued.”

The nominated individual told us, “Everybody is different and everybody’s characteristics are different, so we make sure our staff understands this so that people are not treated unfairly because of their characteristics such as their race, gender, religion disability, age, sexual orientation or even their background.”

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.

People’s goals for the future were captured at the assessment stage and staff supported people to work towards achieving their goals as part of the care plan. People’s wishes were recorded in care plans and reviewed when their needs changed.

People had end of life care plans and a “Do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation” plan in place where appropriate. The nominated individual told us, “We do engage people in end of life [planning] even if they haven’t been prescribed that. We have an advanced care plan, which is part of the support plan where individuals are supported to think about their preferences for the future.”