St Anne's Community Services - York DCA

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 received person-centred care. Staff had a robust understanding of people’s likes and dislikes. Staff and the management team were proactive in supporting people to lead fulfilling and active lives. People routinely took part in activities they enjoyed, such as swimming, sensory rooms, walks, and visits to cafes and farms. Additionally, people were supported to try new things, such as going to concerts, bowling, and animal therapy. People’s enjoyment was monitored and successful activities were built upon. People were involved in planning future events they would like to take part in. Staff also respected when people chose to have a quiet day, and were supported to take part in activities they enjoyed within the home.

The home was personalised to meet people’s needs, including their sensory needs. Staff had created sensory walls and boards with different textures and used different scents throughout the home which people enjoyed. Staff had created a sensory garden which included windchimes, rain catchers, sensory plants and items to encourage different wildlife.

People were involved in choosing decorations and décor throughout their home, and this had created a warm, personalised and homely atmosphere.

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.

Staff supported people to access other services whenever needed. Professionals confirmed that contact and engagement with the service was good. Where possible, people were involved in decisions about accessing other services, and families were included in discussions and decisions. One relative told us, “We have family meetings to discuss health issues; they consult me on decisions and around what is in [person’s] best interests.”

Communication within the service was good, which ensured any key messages from healthcare professionals were relayed consistently to all staff and appointments or follow ups were attended and acted upon.

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

The management team and staff had considered in detail people’s communication needs and there was comprehensive and robust information for staff to follow, to help them effectively communicate with people. Staff recorded where methods had been successful and where they had not, which helped to create strong plans and protocols in this area.

Staff were trained in the method of ‘intensive interaction’, and this had aided communication with people using the service.

The management team had created information for staff in clear and concise formats, to aid learning and understanding.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support.

Where possible, people were supported to give their views at any time they wished to do so. Robust communication plans were in place to aid this process.

The management team and staff met with families regularly, and operated an open-door policy where feedback was encouraged at any time.

Relatives told us communication had improved, with feedback including “There is always someone on hand to speak to”, and “Communication is much better. There is a communication book and a daily diary book.”

The provider had not received any recent complaints, but there was a complaints policy and procedure in place to be followed if required.

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

Staff understood and were knowledgeable about the individual barriers people faced when accessing other services. Staff assessed people’s diverse needs in this area. Individualised support plans were then implemented which detailed how best to support people to access services safely and effectively.

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.

Staff had received equality and diversity training and understood their responsibilities in this area. Staff understood how to apply this training for individuals they supported.

There was no evidence that people had experienced any discrimination or inequality, and the management team were alive to the barriers people may face in this regard and ensured staff understood their roles. The values of dignity, respect and human rights were clearly evidenced throughout people’s risk assessments and support plans, and were discussed in staff supervisions and reviews.

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.

No-one was receiving end of life care at the time our assessment but polices were in place should end of life care be required.

Where people had Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR) decisions in place, this was clearly documented and guidance provided to staff.