Dell Care

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.

People’s relatives told us their family members received care that was person-centred, met their needs and was flexible in meeting those needs. For example, one relative said, “[The service] is brilliant at being flexible due to my and [family member’s] commitments.” Whilst we saw that care plans were individual to each person and people’s relatives told us the care their family members received was person-centred, care plans did not always contain enough detail and/or updated information to ensure this. However, people received care from the same small team of staff meaning their needs were understood and consistently met. This was raised with the registered manager, who gave us assurances this would be 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. We saw that staff had received training in topics that may affect the group of people the service was supporting and people’s relatives told us staff were effective at meeting and understanding their family member’s needs.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. People’s communication needs had been assessed, and we saw they were provided with information on the service to help them make decisions and choices. People received rotas so they knew which staff member was supporting them and when and staff supported some people to keep a planner to help them understand what was happening and when.

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. Whilst there were few formal systems in place for people to provide feedback and suggestions, people told us they regularly communicated with the registered manager about their family member’s needs and that their wishes and suggestions were listened and responded to. No one we spoke with had needed to raise any concerns or complaints but told us they would feel comfortable in doing this and had confidence any concerns would be listened to and rectified. The provider also had a complaints policy in place and appropriately told us how any complaints would be managed should they receive any.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support, and treatment they needed when they needed it. People’s relatives told us they saw the same small group of staff, that they arrived on time and stayed for the allotted time; the records we viewed confirmed this. For example, one relative said, “Staff come on time, are efficient, we have the same carer which [family member] is really happy about and I have recommended [the service] because we are very happy. Very, very happy.” In addition, the service was flexible to meet people’s changing needs and they supported people to attend appointments as required to help support their health, wellbeing, and treatment.

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. People’s relatives told us staff were adept and skilled at supporting the individual needs of their family members considering their vulnerabilities, strengths, and preferences. Staff had been trained in topics that affected the group of people they supported and demonstrated they understood the challenges they faced. Staff had also received training in diversity, equality, and human rights.

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. At the time of the inspection, no one was receiving end of life care, and this is not an area of care the provider specialises in. However, staff had been trained in delivering this type of care and the registered manager gave us an example of where they had previously delivered end of life care, demonstrating kind and compassionate care had been delivered.