Gemini Exclusive Care Mansfield

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, this key question has remained as 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 told us staff understood what was important to them. One person said, “Everything I ask them to do they do. They are always happy to help.” Another person said, “They are really good, they know how I work and like things done and we have got used to each other.

A small number of people and relatives told us that on occasion some staff had not always understood how to prepare food in their preferred way. We raised this with the registered manager. They told us they had identified this as a potentially cultural issue, with some migrant workers needing further guidance on food preparation. Training sessions were held with these staff, and the registered manager was confident this would see improved experiences for people.

Staff told us the care records helped them to understand people’s choices and preferences. A staff member said, “The care plans provide enough information. The tasks are designed to be straightforward and easy to follow. For instance, in the area of food preparation, each task is explained. This includes details about the individual's food preferences. It also covers how they prefer their meals to be prepared and served, as well as their preferred dining locations for enjoying their meals.”

The provider had processes in place to ensure that people received care and support that met their preferences. Care plans and risk assessments were regularly reviewed to ensure people’s needs continued to be met, whilst ensuring people continued to have maximum choice and control over their care

If people were unable to express their wishes, meetings were held with their appropriate relative, advocate or legal representative. Most relatives told us they were regularly involved with decisions about their family members’ care.

We did not look at Care provision, Integration and continuity during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

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

Care records contained guidance for staff to communicate with people effectively, enabling them to be able to respond to their needs and wishes. If people were visually impaired, hard of hearing or were unable to communicate verbally, guidance was in place to support staff.

The registered manager told us alternative formats of records such as font style and size could be made available to people should they need it.

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 knew how to give feedback about their experiences of care and support including how to raise any concerns or issues and could do so in a range of accessible ways.This included in a formal written complaint and a telephone complaint if raising issues with care staff. People and their relatives felt confident that if they complained, they would be taken seriously and treated compassionately.

Records showed few formal complaints had been received; however, appropriate policies were in place to address complaints in a timely manner.

We noted the current complaints policy stated that if people or relatives were not satisfied with the outcome of a complaint, they could raise the complaint with the CQC who would investigate. This is not the correct process as the CQC does not have the authority to formally investigate people’s individual complaints. The provider amended their policy to include the role of the CQC and the process for escalating complaints to the appropriate authorities.

We did not look at Equity in access during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Equity in experiences and outcomes during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

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.

Where people wished to discuss their wishes as they neared the end of their life, appropriate staff had recorded the person’s wishes in a detailed care and support plan. These were reviewed and amended where appropriate.

When a person neared the end of their life and required care from staff; a small, consistent and appropriately trained team of staff were assigned to care for the person. This ensured the person would receive consistent, dignified care.