Sheffield Supported Living

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.

Support plans were person centred and contained a range of information that covered all aspects of the support people needed. They included clear information on the person's identified need, interests, hobbies, likes and dislikes so these could be respected. The plans detailed what was important to the person, personal outcomes and how these would be achieved.

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 and relatives spoke highly of the management and staff and described their approach to people's care as "really good."

Staff clearly 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 provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. The provider was meeting the requirements of the Accessible Information Standard. Staff ensured people had access to information in formats they could understand. People’s communication needs were recorded to ensure staff knew their preferred way of communicating. We saw information was provided in an easy read format.

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 service had effective systems and processes to help people give feedback about their care and support, including raising any concerns or issues. There were also processes in place for the staff and management team to learn from complaints and concerns and use them as opportunities for improvement. One person added, “I have no worries or complaints about them [staff].”

The provider made sure people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.People received support, which was accessible, timely and in line with their diverse needs.

Staff and leaders were aware and alert to discrimination and equality that could disadvantage people from different groups accessing care. They supported people from different cultures and backgrounds and did not discriminate against them.

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 had person centred planning meetings to ensure their outcomes were identified and their voices heard. These included discussions about holidays, one to one support, developing friendships and maintaining contact with relatives and friends. There was an open culture in the service where people were encouraged to voice their views and opinions and felt safe to do so. People were involved in care planning and organising their activities and support.

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 were given the opportunity and support to talk about their end of life choices if they wished to do so. There was no one receiving end of life care during our assessment visit.

Staff told us that people were given the opportunity and support to talk about their end of life choices if they wished to do so. However, records showed staff had not received training in end of life care. This meant they may not have had the skills or confidence to provide effective, compassionate and person-centred support to people approaching the end of their lives. We discussed this with the manager who said they would take action to address this concern.