Karrek Community

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.

Peoples care plans included clear and detailed guidance for staff on how to meet people’s specific needs. All staff were able to access this information digitally via a secure app and additional paper-based records were available when required. Staff told us, “The care plans are up to date and has enough information”.

During our home visits, we observed staff used techniques described in people’s care plans while offering support. People told us, “I understand they record everything through their phones” and “The staff know what they are doing”.

Involved health care professionals were complimentary of the service’s care planning systems and told us, “Care plans reflect a deep understanding of the 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 service was focused on supporting people to live as independently as possible and recognised the value of continuity of care staff and trusting relationships for enabling people’s independence. People were normally supported by small teams of staff who visited regularly. People told us, “I always get on well with [named carer] who I usually have. [They] have supported me for over 6 years and have had a similar experience to me” and “We do things at home together, like watch TV and play Xbox games. We like the same things and don’t fall out. [My staff member] is good company”.

Where significant life events had impacted on people’s wellbeing the service had acted to limit these impacts and ensure consistency of support. The service had engaged proactively with care commissioners to develop specific packages of support when relatives were no longer able to meet individual’s needs.

Both parts of the service actively encouraged people to engage with and participate in local community events. People told us, “They all support me to do things I want. We go out shopping and for coffee. Sometimes we go on trips” and “They support me with socialising; for example, I have a voluntary job at a charity shop and they stay with me”.

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

People reported the service communicated effectively and listened to their requests. One person told us, “I don’t always verbalise how I feel so I have a diary to write things down. When they visit they ask me how my last few days have been and look at my diary. They understand my anxiety and help using distraction and communication”.

Relatives were also complimentary of the service’s communication and the quality of information they received. One relative commented, “Equally the office will ring us with any query, for example they rang about [an issue my relative] found difficult, which was really helpful”.

Staff communicated with people effectively and kept them informed of any changes to planned staffing allocations. Staff were able to describe how people who were non-verbal used body language and specific gestures to communicate their wishes.

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 provider completed regular surveys to gather feedback on people’s experiences, staff opinions and to monitor the service’s performance. Where any issues were reported action plans were developed to address and resolve any significant issues reported.

People understood how to raise issues, make complaints and share compliments with the provider. Information about how to make complaints had been given to everyone using the service and people told us, “I know how to make a complaint”, “Karrek have been a wonderful source of support. They have a 24 hour call line that I’ve been glad to use late at night” and “If something worries me, I talk to my carer and they are helpful. I know I can go to the manager if I need to”. Records showed compliments were regularly received and all complaints were investigated and addressed.

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

People were supported to access health and social care services as required. Records showed staff routinely supported people to book and attend appointments with GPs and dentists and to access more specialist services when required. Professionals frequently relied on staff to support people’s understanding of advice provided and where appropriate advice from professionals had been incorporated into people’s care plans.

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 told us they were able to make alterations to normal patterns of support to enable them to achieve their goals and follow their interests. One person said, “A few weeks ago I banked some hours, to give me more time to visit the Eden project”.

Staff and managers understood the value of this flexible approach in enabling people to live their own lives. Staff comments included, “We try very much to get [Person’s name] to enjoy [their] life, we try to get them to lots of activities”.

Professionals also commented positively on the service’s flexibility and told us, “A recent example of this was when a young [person] was in need of an increase in care, I knew it may have been difficult for them to support due to the time frame, but they accommodated [the person] to make sure that [they] were given the same staff which was imperative.”

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.

The provider had robust systems for documenting and recording people’s preferences in relation to how support should be provided at the end of people’s lives. Where people had made decisions in relation to resuscitation, the service had systems to ensure this information was available to emergency workers when required.