The Piers

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 service met people’s needs.

At our last inspection we rated this key question good. At this inspection 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 service 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 care plans were individualised and reflected what was important to them, including their emotional and social needs.

People took part in activities of their choice, both at home and in the community.

Care plans provided person-centred guidance directing staff how to support people with oral health, communication, behaviour support and daily tasks.

The service 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 had access to health care when needed. One person told us about their recent GP and dentist appointment, staff supported them as required. Staff recorded guidance from healthcare professionals on the service’s electronic system.

Healthcare professionals did not raise any concerns about working in partnership with the service.

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

Staff received the training they needed to support people with communication. For example, 1 person used a specific communication programme. Staff had received relevant training, so they were able to communicate effectively with the person using the programme.

The provider followed the Accessible Information Standard, which tells organisations what they have to do to help ensure people with a disability or sensory loss, and in some circumstances, their carers, get information in a way they can understand. It also says people should get the support they need in relation to communication.

Assessments identified people's communication needs. Care plans highlighted and addressed these, explaining communication needs clearly. Staff provided the support required, and information was provided in formats people understood, such as easy-read documents and pictures.

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

People had regular reviews, and staff observed people to understand their preferences. For example, a person was involved with a regular, planned activity. However, staff noticed they did not seem to enjoy it. In line with the persons preferences, staff arranged for them to attend an alternative activity. One person we spoke to told us they chose what they did each day.

Relatives had the opportunity to provide feedback through surveys, which the provider used to improve the service. A complaints policy and process were in place, and relatives told us they knew who to contact if they had any concerns.

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

The service contacted relevant professionals for support, ensuring people received the support and treatment they required. A person we spoke to told us staff would contact the GP if needed.

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 and relatives were positive about the care and support received. Where people needed additional staff support, the provider ensured this was in place. Staff told us they had enough information to provide people with safe care

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 this inspection the provider was not supporting anybody who was receiving care during the final stages of life. This topic was discussed during annual reviews.