Desire Care - Burton

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 treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

Care records were personalised and generally reflected people’s individual needs. However, there were areas for improvement in documenting all health conditions, and further development was needed to ensure care planning and risk assessments consistently reflected people’s needs.

People remained at the centre of their own care and people and relatives we spoke with told us they were involved in care planning and reviews.

Feedback was gained from people and any areas for improvement were actioned.

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.

People were supported by regular staff members to support consistency in care. One person told us, “I have 2 regular carers at each visit; I still have the same carers I started with. I get a weekly rota so know who's coming and what time.” Another person commented, “[Staff] is definitely reliable; we trust them. They [staff] have been coming some time and know us both well. If they have a concern about one of us, they speak to me.”

The provider made appropriate referrals to health professionals and worked with other organisations and professionals to support people’s continuity in care.

The provider did not always supply appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.The provider did not have a sufficiently robust or effective system in place to identify and address inconsistencies within care documentation. The provider was not always able to easily access information to demonstrate compliance with regulations and for their own assurances.

The provider told us they had identified care documentation needed updating and had started to address this. However, the provider had not implemented an effective systematic approach to completing this work in a timely manner to make sure all staff had access to up-to-date information to provide the appropriate support to people.

People’s care records were held in both paper and electronic formats. Staff described how they communicated with people in ways that met their individual needs, adapting their approach where required. This included using gestures and, where possible, speaking in the person’s preferred language to support understanding.

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 listened to and involved people in their care. People and relatives we spoke with told us they knew how to raise any concerns and felt confident they would be listened to. A relative told us, “I would definitely know who to contact if I needed to raise a concern. I am confident that any concerns would be listened to and acted upon.”

Staff told us they listened to and involved people in their own care. A staff member commented, “I try to treat people with dignity and respect, protect their privacy, and support them in line with their preferences, culture and choices.”

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

People and relatives told us they felt staff supported them appropriately and we saw documentation from other professionals included in people’s care folders. One person told us, “The care itself is very good and consistent.”

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.

The provider worked with people and incorporated their personal preferences within their care documentation. Staff understood people’s different needs and how to address inequalities to promote positive outcomes for people.

People told us they felt staff treated them with dignity and respect, one person commented, “They treat me with respect.”

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 was not delivering end of life care at the time of our inspection. However, staff had received relevant training to ensure they understood how to support people with dignity and in line with their individual preferences at this stage of their life.