HF Trust Devon

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 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.

Care plans were detailed, person-centred, and provided clear guidance for staff on how best to support people’s individual needs and preferences. Daily care records demonstrated staff consistently delivered care in line with these plans, ensuring people’s needs were met.

Staff showed a strong understanding of people’s likes, dislikes, and routines, and provided support in accordance with legislation, standards, and best practice guidance. Information within care records reflected personal preferences, and we observed people being in control of their daily lives, for example, choosing when to get up, where to go, how to spend their time, and what to eat.

Staff were able to explain how they tailored support flexibly, respecting each person’s identity, values, and interests, which promoted independence and positive outcomes.

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 service was focused on supporting people to live as independently as possible, recognising the importance of continuity of staff and building trusting relationships to enable independence. People were usually supported by small, consistent teams who visited regularly, which promoted familiarity and confidence.

The service actively encouraged community participation, with people telling us they were supported to go shopping, enjoy coffee outings, attend trips, and visit places of personal interest such as football stadiums and swimming.

Staff worked in partnership with community health care providers and demonstrated clear knowledge of when to refer individuals for specialist input. They accessed appropriate advice, support, and treatment from a range of health professionals.

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

The provider had successfully implemented a range of communication aids to ensure people using the service could access information in ways which met their individual needs. Staff were observed using diagrams, pictures, and symbols to support understanding and engagement, while Easy Read materials, combining simplified text with images, were available for people with learning disabilities or cognitive impairments. The service demonstrated awareness of the Accessible Information Standard (AIS), which ensures the information is provided in formats people can understand.

Relatives were complimentary of the service’s communication and the quality of information they received. One relative commented, “They [staff] notify me of any concerns and keep me up to date.”

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 regularly gathered feedback through surveys to monitor performance and improve the quality of care. Action plans were developed where issues were identified, and complaints were managed in line with an up-to-date policy. People and relatives understood how to raise concerns or share compliments, and those who had made complaints confirmed they were addressed appropriately.

People told us they were satisfied with the care they received and had no complaints. Staff and managers maintained regular contact with people and their relatives, and communication was generally reported as good. However, 1relativecommented,“Local level newsletters would be good as I only get head office newsletters.”

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

People were supported to access health and social care services, with records showing staff routinely assisted individuals to book and attend appointments with GPs, dentists, and specialist services when required. The provider had also ensured people had hospital passports, supporting adults with learning disabilities and autism to communicate their needs effectively when attending hospital or medical appointments. One relative told us “[Name] has regular reviews with GP,[name] is pretty healthy. HF Trust arrange the referrals for me. They [staff] are responsive with escalating health concerns to relevant health professionals. They always take [name] to the dentist.”

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.

Care plans were detailed and person-centred, capturing the support people needed around their learning disability or autism, relationships, sexuality, physical health, and other specific needs. People were supported to access the services they needed, with staff and the provider working collaboratively with professionals and stakeholders to achieve positive outcomes. Processes were in place to ensure people could express their views and provide feedback. We observed people enjoying meaningful activities and making their own choices,

Staff comments included, “[Name] is always off out and about, it’s really nice to see [name] enjoying life”.

The provider had clear policies and procedures in place around equality and diversity, and staff confirmed they had received training to ensure awareness of people’s protected characteristics and the importance of fair and equal treatment.

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 did not routinely support end of life care, and no one was being supported with end-of-lifecare or in receipt of palliative care at the time of the inspection.

However, the provider had ensured that people’s care plans included future goals and preferences and end-of-life wishes. Staff discussed options with people and their families. Where people did not wish to discuss end-of-life care, staff respected this and planned to revisit the conversation sensitively.