Manu Integrity Services Limited

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 79 (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 were supported to make informed decisions about their care, with clear guidance available for staff on how to meet individual needs. Care plans were detailed, person-centred, and regularly updated, particularly when needs changed or after significant events. Daily records confirmed that care was delivered in line with each person’s needs and preferences.

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.

The registered manager had systems in place to ensure people received continuity of care. Staff were assigned to people. People and their relatives confirmed they knew who was attending calls and they had regular staff. The registered manager was aware of relevant local services and sources of support which may be of benefit to people. They made appropriate referrals where required, and ensured staff followed any advice given by health professionals or specialists.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. People and their relatives raised no concerns about how they were supported to receive information. The provider was aware of, and working in line with, the Accessible Information Standard. This requires providers to assess, record, flag, and meet people’s communication needs, and share information about these communication needs with relevant partners when required. People’s communication needs and preferences were clearly recorded in care plans. This included the use of communication aids as well as how best to talk with people, so they were able to process information. People were provided with information in formats that supported their specific needs or example in easy read formats or larger print. People’s information was kept secure and confidential.

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. People and their relatives told us they had no concerns about the service they received but felt the registered manager took any concerns raised seriously and they were resolved. One relative said, If I have a concern, I can phone the office, and it is dealt with straight away.” Another said, “I have no concerns whatsoever about the care being provided.”

People were actively involved in shaping and improving the service, with regular opportunities to give feedback through reviews, surveys, and ongoing contact with the management team. Leaders maintained a visible and proactive presence, regularly speaking with people by phone and carrying out spot checks to ensure care remained of a high standard. People said there was a strong, open culture where people felt listened to and valued, and where the provider consistently acted on suggestions to improve outcomes. One relative said, “The lines of communication are excellent.”

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

The provider made appropriate referrals and supported people to access the community where appropriate. People were supported to attend healthcare appointments when needed.

People were supported to access these services through easy read documents if required and involved people’s family or advocates where appropriate.

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.

Information about people’s individual needs, including any protected characteristics under the Equality Act, was available to staff in people’s care plans. Staff provided personalised support to ensure people experienced positive outcomes. This included examples of improved wellbeing and maintenance of independence. The provider had an Equality and Diversity policy, and staff had received training in this area. People were encouraged and supported to access community facilities and events that reflected their personal interests and cultural backgrounds.

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 had opportunity to share and record their wishes about the end stage of their lives, should they wish to. The registered manager confirmed they would work alongside relevant health professionals should anyone require support with end-of-life care.