Aspire Care Services Ltd

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.This is the first inspection for this service. This key question has been rated 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 understood their options for the care and support they needed. They understood they had a right to refuse, or to have their support amended to meet changing needs. People were empowered to make decisions about how care was delivered. Staff worked with external agencies to support choices people make to ensure people were safe if required.

Care plans fully reflected peoples mental, emotional and social needs – protected characteristics were documented, and if required specific care needs were implemented to support people appropriately.

The service had a “good times” diary for people to complete if they wished. In this diary, they recorded moments and events which made them feel happy, along with pictures of events and social activities. This ensured people were able to reflect on their good moments, and generate ideas for further activities or things they might want to take part in.

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 provider worked closely with the local authority and appropriate agencies to ensure Aspire Care Services Ltd were able to deliver appropriate care to people before agreeing to support them. The service had a business continuity plan in place. This meant measures had been put in place to ensure the continuous delivery of service to people during unexpected or emergency situations at the service.

Staff told us they closely monitored peoples care and support needs, and if they identified that changes or adjustments were required, they would speak to their manager to ensure the required change was implemented, ensuring to keep people informed of changes due to be implemented in their care.

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

Since 2016 all organisations that provide publicly funded adult social care are legally required to follow the Accessible Information Standard. (AIS) The Accessible Information Standard 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. It also says that people should get the support they need in relation to communication.

We saw evidence to support the provider was supporting people as required in line with AIS standard. People had communication passports in place, which documented clearly how staff should interact with people.

People had the choice to have their communication passports on display within the service if they wished, to aid staff supporting them. Otherwise, these were stored in their personal files.

People had access to their care plans and risk assessments, and these were presented in a way they could understand. Staff would support people to review and understand information provided if required.

People’s daily notes were pictorial, which aided people to read and understand what was being documented about them.

A member of staff said, “We keep care plans and records up to date. Staff are told about any changes through handovers, meetings and staff communication. We also make sure [people] are informed and involved in decisions about their care.”

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.

Staff told us they had no concerns with speaking up about concerns, or ideas for improvement they might have with the service. A staff member said, “We can speak to our manager at any time and share our ideas, concerns or complaints. We also have regular staff meetings where we can give feedback and ask questions. There is also a feedback box in the lounge, which was created by people [who use the service] so people can leave feedback or suggestions.”

The provider had a complaints policy in place. Concerns were recorded and reviewed appropriately. The service maintained a complaints log which detailed actions taken in response to issues raised and, where necessary, identified measures to reduce the likelihood ofrepetition.

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

We saw evidence to show that all people using the service received support care and treatment regardless of their needs or protected characteristics. One staff member told us, “[People] get support to book, prepare and attend all appointments.”

People had the manager’s personal numbers, and they could contact them at any time for support if they did not want to speak to staff on site.

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 understood the importance of promoting equality and preventing discrimination. They told us they had no concerns about discriminatory practices within the service and were confident people were treated fairly and with respect.

Staff recognised that people could experience discrimination or barriers when accessing services and opportunities within their local community. Staff supported people to attend health and social care appointments, as well as social and leisure activities that were important to them. This helped to ensure people had access to healthcare, community resources and meaningful experiences, regardless of their individual support needs. As a result, people were enabled to maintain social connections, participate in their local communities, and achieve outcomes that mattered to them.

Staff had no concerns with discrimination within the service. They understood that people might face discrimination outside the service while in the community and how to support them with this.

Staff had received training in Equality and Human Rights and understood how to support people well regardless of their protected characteristics.

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 service had planned ahead to support people to move towards independence, so they could eventually live on their own. Scheduled support was in place to help people be independent with maintaining their own homes, managing their medicines, making appointments and managing their shopping was in place.

People’s care plans documented their advanced care support needs, if they wished to share this with the provider. People had DNARs in place as required, and people were involved in the planning of their advanced care support needs.

Staff had received training in end-of-life care, so they were equipped to support people with this advanced care need if required.

The service had an end-of-life policy in place