Archived: Personal Assist South Yorkshire Also known as 1-5103752706

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 changed to requires improvement. This meant people’s needs were not always met.

This service scored 50 (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 did not always make sure people were at the centre of their care. Records were mostly person centred, however we found some information relating to people’s diagnosis and health needs lacking. People were supported to do things which were meaningful to them. A relative said, “Staff respect [name] privacy and dignity. When providing personal care, they shut the door.” And a person said, “I like knitting and crochet. Staff will sit and help me make hats. I make premature baby hats and other hats.” People told us staff respected their privacy, and records evidenced compliments from people and relatives relating to people retaining their independence.

There were some shortfalls in how the provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was not always joined-up, flexible or supportive of choice and continuity. We received mixed feedback from people about staff calls, some people told us staff did not arrive or were late, whilst others were happy with their care and support. Some people told us they lacked continuity of care due to the staff changes. A relative said, “We have complained, and have not heard anything. The carers will be late. They tell the office to let us know. They do not let us know.” We found some gaps in daily records and call logs, which had not been identified by the management team.

The provider did not always supply appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. People had communication care plans in place, which detailed people's communication needs and methods. This included communication apps and the use of Makaton. However, staff were not trained and would benefit from training in the use of Makaton. Staff had received training about how to support people living with a learning disability and autistic people.

The provider did not always make it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff did not always involve people in decisions about their care or tell them what had changed as a result. People told us they were involved in their care planning, and they had a copy of their care plan. Audits and reviews of people's care had recently been undertaken. However, these had failed to recognise concerns we identified in relation to people's care records. The provider had plans in place to undertake monthly catch ups with people to ensure they were happy with their care and treatment. However, these required embedding into practice.

The provider did not always make sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. Some people told us they felt uneasy due to the staff changes. A relative said, “Depends on the carer. Some of the carers have a good understanding. Some that do not understand. Some are excellent and some are not.” We also found some daily records which indicated a person was upset due to receiving staff not known to them. During our assessment we observed people contacting the office and speaking with staff for long periods of time, office staff were patient, kind and responsive during their conversations with people.

Staff and leaders did not always actively listen to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes. This meant people’s care was not always tailored in response to this. People were supported with care tasks, community outings and keeping their homes clean. People were supported to go shopping, attend health appointments and attend activities, such as sports, nightclubs and day centres. People's care plans contained people’s preferences about how their personal care was undertaken. Complaints were recorded and monitored. However, some people and relatives told us they had not received a resolution or response to complaints, whilst others said the staff were responsive. A person said, “I have made a complaint about a staff member, but they still send them.”

People were not always 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 our assessment, no one was receiving care at the end of their life. Some improvements were required to ensure people's care records contained their future goals and aspirations.