Focus Care Link Ltd - Waltham Forest Branch

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 service 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 service 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. People received care and treatment individually tailored for them, and the service made reasonable adjustments where necessary. People using the service and their relatives told us they were regularly involved in the planning of their care and support, so it was centred around them and their needs.

The service understood the diverse health and care needs of people, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity. A relative told us, ‘’Any changes were accommodated by the office; if [family member] had a hospital appointment, they would adjust the visit time.’’ People using the service told us they received care from the same staff, so they could enjoy continuity of care.

The service supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. People received information in ways they could understand. The provider offered various formats including pictures and signs and interpreters if required by people using the service.

The service made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. They involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result. People using the service and their representatives told us they understood how to provide feedback, share ideas, or raise concerns about their care, support, and treatment. People told us they felt confident the service would take appropriate action if they raised a concern or complaint. The service provided opportunities for people to share their views in the service user forum group and carried out telephone monitoring calls. These were used to listen to feedback, concerns, or complaints and were seen as opportunities to improve the service and the quality-of-care people received.

The service had a proactive and positive culture of safety, based on openness and honesty. They listened to concerns about safety and investigated and reported safety events. Safety incidents were appropriately investigated and reported. Staff told us they understood how to record incidents or accidents, and how to report safety concerns. A staff member commented, '‘They reviewed accidents and incidents to understand what went wrong and to prevent it from happening again. They shared the lessons learned with the team to help improve safety.’’ Safety events and actions taken were discussed at the staff meeting to aid learning. Lesson learnt reports included recommended actions to prevent re-occurrence and keep people safe.

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 supported equity in both experience and outcomes. For example, a person with limited mobility had a care plan that included the use of specialist equipment and scheduled support to enable them to access community activities. This helped ensure they had the same opportunities for engagement and independence as others using the service. Staff had received training to help them understand equality and to identify and address discrimination.

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 decisions and what mattered to them were reflected in personalised care plans. People using the service were supported to make informed choices about their care while they had the capacity to do so. The service was not providing end-of-life care at the time of our assessment.